Review Petition No 249 of 1984
In Special Leave Petition C No 13618 of 1983 CHAMBER MATTER By Circulation The order of the Court was delivered by CHINNAPPA REDDY J
This application for Review is nothing 206 short of an abuse of the process of the Court and waste of the time of this Court time which has now become so dear and precious because of the daily mounting arrears
No ground for seeking a review is mentioned or even hinted at in the petition
In the first paragraph of the petition it is stated This is an application for Review of the order dated 91283 whereby this Hon ble Court was pleased to dismiss the above Special Leave to Appeal Civil
The said order discloses an error apparent on the face of the record as will be clear from perusal of the various grounds and facts mentioned in the petition for Special Leave to Appeal
It is submitted that since the order is unsustainable in view of the facts and circumstances of the case this Hon ble Court may be pleased to review the order
In the second paragraph we are told that no detailed grounds have been taken though in point of fact not a single ground is even mentioned as limitation is about to expire and If so advised further set of grounds would be submitted for the consideration of the Hon ble Court The petition was filed on 911984 and nothing has been done though more than six months have passed since then
The offer to file detailed grounds remains an unredeemed promise
Possibly he was advised to file no further grounds as there was none to be submitted
Good words were not to be thrown away after bad
To that extent we may consider ourselves spared
We must however express our deep dissatisfaction and anguish with the indiscriminate manner in which petitions for special leave and petitions for review are being filed
The present application is entirely frivolous and is accordingly dismissed
section R Petition dismissed


Summary:
An application for review against the order of dismissal of the Special Leave Petition dated 91283 was filled without disclosing any ground for review
It was averred that the petition was being filed so as to be within the limitation prescribed under Order XL of the Supreme Court Rules and that further grounds would be filed if advised
However nothing was done though more than six months had elapsed by the date of hearing
Dismissing the petition expressing its deep dissatisfaction and anguish with the indiscriminate manner in which petitions for Special Leave and petitions for Review were being filed in the Supreme Court 206A  HELD The application for review was nothing short of an abuse of the process of the court a waste of the time of the Court and was entirely frivolous