K.J. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.97 OF 2009 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.97 OF 2009 LETTERS PATENT APPEAL NO.97 OF 2009 IN WRIT PETITION NO.7583 OF 2008 Rakesh Sacheti & Anr. )..Appellants Vs. Doordarshan E.C.H.Society Ltd., & Anr.)..Respondents ---- Mr.Ghanshyam Upadyaya for the appellants. Mr.N.V.Walawalkar Sr.Advocate i/by R.M.Haridas for respondents. ---- Coram : D.K.Deshmukh & Coram : D.K.Deshmukh & Coram : D.K.Deshmukh & R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ R.S.Mohite,JJ Date : 16.4.2009. PC 1. The appellant by this appeal challenges the order passed by the learned single Judge in Writ Petition No.7583 of 2008. Perusal of the record of that petition shows that the petitioner himself has stated in that petition that he was filing that petition under Article-227 of the Constitution of India. In view of the settled law laid down by the Supreme Court, in our opinion, appeal cannot be entertained. The Division Bench in the case of Mansaram Sampat Vs. Sambhu Harchand reported in Mansaram Sampat Vs. Sambhu Harchand reported in Mansaram Sampat Vs. Sambhu Harchand reported in 2004(4) Mh.L.J. 1105 2004(4) Mh.L.J. 1105 2004(4) Mh.L.J. 1105 has considered various judgments of the Supreme Court and clearly held that when the petitioner himself mentions in the petition : 2 : that he is filing the petition under Article-227 of the Constitution of India, no Letters patent Appeal would lie under clause 15 of the Letters Patent. There is no question of going into the contents of the petition to find out whether petitioner could have filed the petition under any other article of the Constitution. Appeal is not maintainable. It is rejected. (D.K.Deshmukh,J) (D.K.Deshmukh,J) (D.K.Deshmukh,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J) (R.S.Mohite,J)