1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.6351 OF 2005 M/s.R.K. Dye Chem & Ors. ...Petitioners. Vs. Maharashtra State Electricity Board & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr. Anilkumar Patil for the Petitioners. Ms.A. R. S. Baxi for Respondent No.1. ..... CORAM : F.I REBELLO AND DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, JJ. October 7, 2005. P.C. The Petitioner had earlier approached the Grievance Committee which, by an order dated 23rd March 2005, rejected his complaint. The Grievance Committee had formulated point for consideration. The point was whether the meters mentioned were defective. The same was answered in the negative. An appeal came to be preferred before the Ombudsman, where again in para 16, the issues for consideration were formulated and after again considering the material produced, the Ombudsman concurred with the findings of fact as recorded by the Forum as noted in para 24 of the order. There are, therefore, concurrent findings of fact that the meters were not defective. 2 It is not open to this Court in the exercise of extraordinary jurisdiction to consider whether the evidence placed on record was sufficient for recording the findings, unless there was no evidence on record. There is no error apparent on the face of the record, warranting interference in the extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. Hence, no interference is called for. The petition is rejected. ( F.I. Rebello, J. ) (Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud, J.)