1 FARAD CONTINUATION SHEET NO. IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY BENCH AT AURANGABAD REVIEW APPLICATION NO.182 OF 2010 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 4449 OF 2009 [Manohar Sadashivrao Dupare Vs.The State of Mah.& others] Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders Shri.H.A.Joshi,Advocate for Applicant. Shri.S.D.Kaldate,A.G.P.for Respondent. .... CORAM: NARESH H. PATIL AND K.K. TATED, JJ. DATE : 28TH SEPTEMBER,2010. PER COURT : 1. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant. 2. Mr.Joshi, learned Counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the application filed by the applicant was decided at belated stage by the State Government, therefore, the applicant can not be held responsible for the same. 3. The learned counsel placed reliance 2 Office Notes, Office Memoranda of Coram, appearances, Court’s orders or directions and Registrar’s orders. Court’s or Judge’s Orders on the Judgment in the matter M/s Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. Vs. The Government of Andhra Pradesh represented by the Deputy Commissioner of Commercial Taxes Ananatpur, reported in AIR 1964 Supreme Court 1372 and submits that as there is apparent error on the face of record, therefore, this Review Application requires to be entertained. 4. The grounds raised in this Review Application are not different than the issues raised by the applicant in earlier Writ Petition. Those issues were considered and accordingly we have passed order on 8th July, 2010. The grounds of review do not commend to us. The Application is rejected. Sd/- Sd/- [K.K. TATED, J.] [NARESH H. PATIL,J.] MTK 3