1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION ST.NO.17670 OF 2007 IN WRIT PETITION NO.8929 OF 2004 The State of Maharashtra .. Petitioner Versus Mrs.Madhavi S. Deshpande .. Respondent Mr.R.M.Patne, A.G.P. for petitioner Ms.Seema Sarnaik for respondent. CORAM : S.C.DHARMADHIKARI, J. DATE : 11th July 2008 P.C. . By consent of parties, the review petition is taken up on board for admission. 2. Heard learned Counsel for the original petitioner and Mr.Patne, A.G.P. for Review Petitioner. Perused the review petition. 2 3. Each of the grounds that are purportedly set out as ground for review form part of the writ petition. The argument proceeded on the basis that the labour court had committed an error in allowing the claim of respondent. All arguments were advanced on merits. That apart, the ground that the department is not an industry was not pressed. 4. Similarly, the ground with regard to compliance with the requirement of completion of 240 days of service has also been considered. This is not a court of appeal. That apart, a Special Leave Petition was dismissed against the order passed by this Court. For all these reasons, there is no ground made out for review of the order passed in the above writ petition. Review petition is, therefore, dismissed. 3 (S.C.Dharmadhikari, J)