1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICUATURE AT MUMBAI ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION NOTICE OF MOTION NO. 275 OF 2009 IN REVIEW PETITION (LODG.) NO. 23 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 213 OF 1998 The Chief of the Naval Staff & Ors. .. ... Petitioners. Versus S. N. Barik. .. ... Respondent. Mr. Rui Rodriques with Mr. S. C. Pal for the Petitioners. Mr. V. N. Tayde for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 22ND MARCH, 2010 P. C.: Considering the order of the Supreme Court in I. A. taken out in Special Leave Petition (Civil) No. 6652 of 2009, the delay in filing the review petition has been condoned. The present notice of motion has, therefore, become infructuous and is dismissed as infructuous. 2. Office to register the review petition. Sd/- (F.I. REBELLO,J.) Sd/- (A. A. SAYED, J.) 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICUATURE AT MUMBAI ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (LODG.) NO. 23 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 213 OF 1998 The Chief of the Naval Staff & Ors. .. ... Petitioners. Versus S. N. Barik. .. ... Respondent. Mr. Rui Rodriques with Mr. S. C. Pal for the Petitioners. Mr. V. N. Tayde for the Respondent. CORAM : F.I. REBELLO & A. A. SAYED, JJ. DATED : 22ND MARCH, 2010 P. C.: Rule. 2. The question to be considered is, whether the Naval order of 1967 continue to be in force or was substituted by the Circular of 1998 considering the pleadings by the respondent (original petitioner) that the Circular is not a naval order. 3. It is the case of the original petitioner that even the persons, who have received less than 50% marks were selected. It will be open for the petitioner to file an affidavit disclosing the said fact. 4. There will be interim relief in terms of prayer clause (b) of the review petition, pending the hearing and final disposal of the review petition. 3 5. Considering the controversy, place the review petition on board for final hearing on 20th April, 2010 at 3.00 p.m. Sd/- (F.I. REBELLO,J.) Sd/- (A. A. SAYED, J.)