FARAD FARAD FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN IN IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL CIVIL CIVIL APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. APPELLATE SIDE. REVIEW PETITION NO. 65 OF 2006 IN WRIT WRIT WRIT PETITION NO. 642 OF 200 PETITION NO. 642 OF 200 PETITION NO. 642 OF 2006 ---------------------------------------------------------------- ---------------- ---------------- Office Notes, Office Memorada Court‘s or Judge‘s orders or directions and Orders. Registrar‘s orders. ---------------------------------------------------------------- Shri A.J.Rana Sr. Counsel with Shri H.V.Mehta for the petitioner. Shri S.N.Kantawala with Mr. Vinod Kothari for the Respdt. CORAM; CORAM; CORAM; V.G.PALSHIKAR & V.G.PALSHIKAR & V.G.PALSHIKAR & SMT. SMT. SMT. NISHITA MHATRE,JJ. NISHITA MHATRE,JJ. NISHITA MHATRE,JJ. DTAED: DTAED: DTAED: 12TH APRIL,2006 12TH APRIL,2006 12TH APRIL,2006. P.C. 1. By this application, the Union of India seeks review of the order passed by us on 16-2-2006. That order was passed on duly agreed minutes of the order. 2. By Review Petition, it is contended that serious injuries of vast magnitude are likely to be caused if the order is not reviewed. The order dt. 16-2-2006 was passed as agreed but it is not implemented so far. The grounds given for seeking review are not such ground as can result in reviewing of the petition. Subsequent events are being placed before us for seeking review of the order. 3. In our opinion, the proper remedy for the Union of India is to challenge this order before the Supreme Court of India. Looking to the gravity of the matter and apprehended injury, which is to be avoided, we direct that the order dated 16-2-2006 may not be implemented for two more weeks. Review petition is therefore dismissed. 4. The decision of the review petition is pertaining to the review petition itself, other proceedings are not covered by this order. ...