1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 241 OF 2006 IN REVIEW PETITION (ST) NO. 21271 OF 2001 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3228 OF 2000 WRIT PETITION NO. 3228 OF 2000 WRIT PETITION NO. 3228 OF 2000 Mr. V.D. Bhavsar ... Petitioner Versus Bar Council of Mah. & Ors.... Respondents Applicant in person present. Mr.C.R. Sonawane, A.G.P. for R. No. 4. Mr. G.H. Keluskar for R. No. 3. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,JJ. DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,JJ. DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD,JJ. DATED : JANUARY 27, 2006 DATED : JANUARY 27, 2006 DATED : JANUARY 27, 2006 P.C. . The Petitioner in Writ Petition has sought to withdraw the Petition. That was allowed to be withdrawn. The learned Bench of this court by order dated 19.7.2000 while permitting the petitioner to withdraw the petition, directed the petitioner to pay costs of Rs. 1,000/-. . The Petitioner aggrieved, preferred S.L.P. 2 before the Apex Court being S.L.P. (Civil) No. 20235 of 2000. On behalf of the Petitioner, the learned counsel appearing for him sought permission to withdraw the petition which is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn on 11.12.2000. No liberty was taken either to prefer review application or any other application. . The Petitioner thereafter filed review application before this court which was numbered as Stamp No. 21271 of 2001. It is dated 15.6.2001. That was dismissed. The Petitioner had failed to remove the office objections as set out in the conditional order of additional Registrar dated 3.6.2002. As the Petitioner failed to remove office objections within the period of four weeks, that review application was rejected. . The Petitioner thereafter took out Civil Application (St) No. 21271 of 2001 on 9.7.2002 seeking condonation of delay. Thereafter, a fresh civil application has been taken being C.A. No. 241 of 2006 to set aside the conditional order dated 3.6.2002 passed in review application. 3 . We have perused the orders and heard the parties. This court after hearing the parties by speaking order had dismissed the petition as withdrawn and imposed costs on the petitioner. The Petitioner had challenged that action before the Apex Court. Special Leave petition was withdrawn unconditionally. Considering that even if this review application was rejected for having failed to remove the office objections, we do not think this to be a fit case where this court should entertain the present civil application. In the light of that Civil Application rejected. Similarly C.A. (st) No. 21271 of 2001 also rejected. (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,J.) (DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,J.) (DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD,J.)