1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLN. NO.: 2583 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. CIVIL APPLN. NO.: 2583 OF 2011 IN REVIEW APPLN. NO.: 171 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.: 5632 OF 2005 *** 1. The application is moved pointing out urgency. It is contended that time to comply with the orders of this Court dated 9th February, 2011 expires today. It is further urged that learned counsel for petitioner could not establish any communication with the Respondent in Review Application and hence the order could not be complied with. 2. Shri Mantri, who appears for Review Applicant (Respondent No.1 in the writ petition) has invited attention of this Court to the fact that present application is not moved as per instructions and hence no orders are required to be passed upon it. He also states that if such application is filed, as per instructions, he may consider giving no objection at that time. 2 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE, BENCH AT AURANGABAD. CIVIL APPLN. NO.: 2583 OF 2011 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions Court’s or Judge’s orders. and Registrar’s orders. 3. Perusal of paragraph 3 of the application shows that learned Counsel for the Applicant has tried his best to communicate the order to the Respondent no.1. In the circumstances, the reason for extension must come from Respondent No.1 and not from counsel. Application is, therefore, rejected. [B.P.DHARMADHIKARI, J.] Dated:23/02/2011. ans/2583