IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 1840 OF 2005 PETITION NO. 1840 OF 2005 PETITION NO. 1840 OF 2005 Poruri Lakshmi Prasad ... Petitioner V/s. Indian Petrochemicals Corp. ... Respondents Ltd. & Ors. Ms. Rekha Rajgopal for petitioner. Mr. C.U. Singh, Sr. Counsel with Ms. M. D’Souza i/b. A.S. Dayal Associates for respondent Nos. 1 & 2. CORAM CORAM CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & : F.I. REBELLO & ANOOP ANOOP ANOOP V. MOHTA,JJ. V. MOHTA,JJ. V. MOHTA,JJ. DATED DATED DATED : 22nd September, 2006 : 22nd September, 2006 : 22nd September, 2006 P.C. . The petitioner earlier had filed petition being Writ Petition No. 1751 of 2002. The petitioner had sought leave to withdraw the petition to file appropriate proceeding for the relief presently sought. Liberty was granted to file appropriate proceeding. The petitioner once again filed petition challenging the order. In our opinion, second petition would not lie considering the withdrawal of the previous petition with liberty to file appropriate proceeding. Even if we could have considered the argument, there are no averments to show any deep and pervasive control by the Union of India in the running of respondent No.1. ( 2 ) 2. For all the aforesaid reasons, we find that this would not be a fit case to exercise our extra ordinary jurisdiction. Hence petition disposed of. [F.I. [F.I. [F.I. REBELLO, J.] REBELLO, J.] REBELLO, J.] [ANOOP [ANOOP [ANOOP V. MOHTA, J.] V. MOHTA, J.] V. MOHTA, J.]