- 1 - IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO.89/2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.3379/2009 Nandkishor Ramnivas Agrawal. ...Applicant.. (review petitioner) Versus The Collector, Latur, and others. ...Respondents... ..... Shri R.R. Mantri, Advocate for applicant. Shri S.B. Talekar, Advocate for original writ petitioners. Shri V.G. Sakolkar, Advocate for original respondent no.3. ..... CORAM: K.U. CHANDIWAL, J. DATE: 17.06.2009 PER COURT: Heard respective counsel. - 2 - Unfortunately, the counsel for the review petitioner / applicant made allegations of playing fraud on the Court, having serious implications to the litigation and also to the conduct of the counsel for the respective parties. Without adverting to the merits of such allegations, the short point in the matter, which requires to be clarified, is whether the orders passed in Writ Petition (St) No.10867/2009 (Writ Petition No.3379/2009) decided on 5.6.2009 will be binding on other parties, who were deleted at the time of order by Mr.S.B. Talekar, representing the petitioners – Rahibai Dattu Bande, Jaibai Nagorao Gadekar and Shardabai Machindra Chendge. It is clarified that the orders in the writ petition will not be binding on the rights and interests of the third parties, who are deleted from the writ petition. With this clarification, the civil application for review is disposed of. (K.U. Chandiwal, J.) ndk/c176091