1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE WRIT PETITION NO.9358 OF 2009 Fie Research Institute. ...Petitioner. Vs. Central Board of Direct Taxes & Ors. ...Respondents. .... Mr.A.Ashokan for the Petitioner. None for Respondents. ..... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. May 6, 2010. P.C. : Called for Speaking to the Minutes of the order dated 22 April 2010. The attention of the Court has been drawn to the fact that two separate orders were passed by the Government of India in the Ministry of Finance on 12 September 2008, rejecting the application for approval under Section 35(1)(ii), which are annexed at Exhibits F and G to the Petition. However, inadvertently the order of this Court contained a reference to only one order dated 12 September 2008. In the circumstances, it would be appropriate to correct the order of the Court in the following terms: 2 ­(i) In the last sentence of paragraph 2, the words “a cryptic order” shall stand substituted by the words, “by two cryptic orders” and the word, “records” shall stand substituted by the word “record”; ­(ii) In paragraph 5, in the second sentence the word, “order” shall be substituted by the word, “orders” and the word, “has” shall stand substituted by the word, “have”. Similarly, in the sentence beginning with the words, “In order to facilitate”, the word “order” shall stand substituted by the word “orders” and the word, “is” shall stand substituted by the word “are”. The Registry is directed to carry out the aforesaid corrections and to issue a fresh certified copy. ( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) ( J.P.Devadhar, J.) 3