- (1.) HAVING heard counsel appearing on both sides, we do not think that the petitioner is entitled to any relief from this Commission in this case. The questions in issue have already been considered by the High Court of Gujarat in a writ petition filed by the petitioner which was dismissed by a single Judge of that Court, Subsequently the judgment of the learned single Judge was confirmed by a Division Bench of the High Court. A special leave petition filed by the petitioner was thereafter dismissed by the Supreme Court of India. Thus the pensioner's case has been concurrently rejected by all the Courts. In the circumstances, it is not open to this Commission to go behind the said judgments and investigate into the allegation of the petitioner that there was a deficiency in the service on the part of Gujarat State Financial Corporation in its dealings with the petitioner which culminated in the sale of the petitioner's industrial undertaking. This Petition is, accordingly, dismissed.
(2.) HAVING regard to the fact that the petitioners' property has already been sold away, we do not consider this a fit case for awarding costs. .;