1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR MISC. CIVIL APPLICIATION (REVIEW) No. 279/2010 IN C.A.No. 410/2010 IN WRIT PETITION No. 1592/2009. Foseco India Ltd. -: versus :- Mr. Navnit Kumar Ramath Prasad Divedi Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders or directions and Registrar's orders. CORAM : B.P. DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATED : MARCH 23, 2010. Heard Shri P.N. Khadgi, learned counsel for applicant and Shri Dwivedi, respondent – in-person. Shri Khadgi, learned counsel has invited attention to the application as filed as part of his arguments and contended that the scope of reference under Section 10[1] of the Industrial Disputes Act has been enlarged by this Court. He argues that no grounds were given for seeking amendment by petitioner. The scope of Reference under Section 10[1] has not been enlarged and because petitioner-inperson wanted to seek certain relief directly against his employer under the provisions of Bombay Shops and Establishment Act, this Court has allowed that amendment and placed the matter before the Division Bench, because that pat of relief could not have been considered by this Court. It is apparent that 2 merits of amendment cannot be looked into by the Court while considering the question whether amendment needs to be allowed or rejected. Hence, no case for review is made out. Application is therefore rejected with no order as to cost. JUDGE Rgd.