SSK/915 1 rp st. 17268.11 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION REVIEW PETITION (ST.) NO. 17268 OF 2011 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 3629 OF 2011 Mr. Nazir Abdul Aziz Shaikh & Ors. ....Petitioners Versus Mr. Adil Ali Dilawar Ali Khan & Ors. ...Opponents Mr. T. D. Deshmukh for the petitioners. Mr. A. M. Kulkarni, Advocate for respondent no.1. Mr. V. B. Naik i/b. Ms. Chaitrali Deshmukh, Advocate for respondent nos. 2 & 3. Mr. S. D. Rayrikar, AGP for respondent nos. 4 to 6. CORAM : RANJIT MORE, J. DATED : 26th SEPTEMBER, 2011. P.C.: Heard Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioners, Mr. Kulkarni, learned counsel for respondent no.1, Mr. Naik, learned counsel for respondent nos. 2 & 3 and Mr. Rayrikar, learned AGP for respondent nos. 4 to 6. 2. The review petition seeks review of Order dated 4th May, 2011 under which Writ Petition No.3629 of 2011 was disposed of in terms of the Consent Terms signed by respondent no.1 and respondent nos. 2 & 3. The petitioners were not party to the above said writ petition. SSK/915 2 rp st. 17268.11 3. Mr. Deshmukh, learned counsel for the petitioners states that the review petitioners are in charge of day to day affairs of the Trust by name Union Education Society. He further submits that the subject matter of the writ petition was an Order under Section 36-A(3) of the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950. Despite this position, by the said consent terms, it was agreed that respondent nos. 2 & 3 will continue to function as President and Secretary. 4. The review petitioners were not party to the writ petition. The consent terms were signed by respondent no.1 on one hand and respondent nos. 2 & 3 on the other hand. The writ petition was disposed of in terms of the consent terms. Whatever stated in the consent terms will bind only respondent no.1 and respondent nos. 2 & 3 respectively. Since, the present review petitioners were not party to the writ petition, the consent terms will not bind them. The authorities under the Bombay Public Trusts Act, 1950 will dispose of the Change Reports pending before them in accordance with law and without being influenced by Order dated 4th May, 2011 passed in the aforesaid writ petition. With the above observations, the review petition is disposed of. (RANJIT MORE, J.)