JUDGMENT Heard Mr. S.P. Singh, learned counsel for the appellant as well as Mr. Balram Yadav, learned counsel for the respondent-Bank. 2. This special appeal has arisen out of the order dated 18.01.2013 passed by the learned Single Judge in writ petition no.6569 (S/S) of 2009. Learned Single Judge had dismissed the writ petition on the ground that the controversy had already been dealt with in writ petition no.2385 (S/S) of 1999, which was dismissed vide order dated 06.03.2006. The special appeal filed against the said order being special appeal no.257 of 2006 was also dismissed on 17.08.2007. The order passed in special appeal on 17.08.2007 was appealed before the Supreme Court through Special Leave to Appeal no.22091 of 2007, which too was dismissed on 03.12.2007. Therefore, the learned Single Judge held that the filing of the writ petition was an abuse of process of the Court and dismissed the writ petition with costs of Rs. 10,000/-. 3. The appellant has submitted that in the earlier matter, the order of dismissal was dealt with, whereas in the appeal, the same was modified to the extent of withholding increment, which was further modified to the extent of awarding censure entry, however, since the modified order of punishment was not brought to the notice of the Supreme Court, the Supreme Court upheld the order passed in the appeal as well as in the writ petition. 4. We have perused the order passed by the learned Single Judge and found that this fact has been dealt with by the learned Single Judge. The learned Single Judge had given the finding that the appellant had filed a review petition mentioning all the grounds above before the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court vide judgment dated 11.05.1999 dismissed the review petition no.560 of 1993 with following order: "Delay condoned. We have carefully gone through the review petitions and the connected papers. We do not find any merit in the review petitions. They are, accordingly, dismissed." 5. We are of the view that all these facts were brought to the knowledge of the Supreme Court nevertheless the Supreme Court dismissed the review petition, there is no reason to reconsider the appellant's matter in light of the modified order of punishment. In the result, the special appeal stands dismissed.