FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 144 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2911 OF 2006 “Naserkhan s/o. Sherkhan and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 1 Mr. Milind Patil (Beedkar) Advocate for applicant. Mr. V.D. Godbharle, AGP for respondent Nos. 1 to 3. Mr. V.C. Patil, Advocate holding for Mr. U.B. Bondar, Advocate for respondent No.6 in W.P. Mr. S.S. Thombre, Advocate for petitioner in W.P. CORAM :- D.B. BHOSALE & M.T. JOSHI,JJ. DATE :- 29TH JUNE, 2011. PER COURT :- 1] Heard learned counsel for the applicant. 2] By this application, the applicants are seeking review of the order dated 1st April,2011 by which the writ petition (PIL) has been disposed of. 3] Learned counsel for the applicant submits that though the applicants were parties to the writ petition, it was not brought to the notice of the court that their appeal bearing Regular Civil Appeal No.165/2009 is pending before the District Court. Applicant's appeal is arising from the judgment and decree passed by the trial court, whereby, their suit for injunction came to be dismissed. Admittedly, no interim order of whatsoever nature has been passed by the appellate authority, till this date. FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO. 144 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 2911 OF 2006 “Naserkhan s/o. Sherkhan and others Vs. The State of Maharashtra and others” Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram appearances, Court's Orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. 2 In that view of the matter, no case for review is made out. Hence, the review application is dismissed. [M.T. JOSHI,J.] [D.B. BHOSALE, J.] grt/-