IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA MISC.CIVIL APPLICATION NO. 188 OF 2008 IN WRIT PETITION NO. 600 OF 2007 COUNCIL OF ARCHITECTURE INDIA HABITAT CENTER THROUGH REGISTRAR ... Applicant Versus MR. VENANCIO C. FERNANDES AND ANR., ... Respondents Mr. Shivan Dessai, Advocate for the Applicant. Mr. S.S. Kantak, Advocate General with Ms. R. Chodankar, Addl. Govt. Advocate for original Respondents no. 1,4 & 6. Mr. S.N. Joshi, Advocate for original Respondent No. 7. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO & R.C. CHAVAN, JJ. Date:- 18th July, 2008 P.C.: Heard Shri Dessai, the learned Counsel on behalf of the applicant. The applicant was respondent no. 3 in Writ Petition No. 600/2007, decided by this Court on 9/01/2008. 2. Shri Dessai has submitted that the applicant does not wish to press for prayer clause 'A'. However, learned Counsel Shri Dessai submits that the order dated 9/01/2008 be clarified stating that the said order will not come in the way of any action which may be taken by the Council on the question of non-adherence with the eligibility criteria prescribed by the Council under the Architects Act, 1972. 3. We are disinclined to grant such a prayer in review jurisdiction. It is not the case of the applicant that there is any error apparent on the face of the record of the order dated 9/01/2008. By the said order, only the rights of the petitioner vis-a-vis the private respondent under the existing rules was decided by the Court. Whether the said rules confirm to the criteria prescribed by the Council under the Architects Act, 1972 is entirely a different matter. 4. With the above observation, we proceed to dismiss the application for review. N. A. BRITTO, J. R.C. CHAVAN, J. NH