Review jurisdiction requires an error apparent on the record; absent that threshold, dismissal follows.

The Supreme Court held that review jurisdiction is limited and cannot be invoked unless an error apparent on the face of the record is shown. On perusal of the review petition and record, the Court found no such error had been demonstrated, so the threshold for review was not met. The request for oral hearing was also rejected, and the review petition was dismissed.

---

---

Issues: Whether any error apparent on the face of the record was shown so as to warrant review of the earlier order.

Analysis: The Court found, on perusal of the review petition and the record, that no error apparent on the face of the record had been demonstrated. In the absence of such an error, the limited jurisdiction in review was not attracted.

Conclusion: The review petition was dismissed, the request for oral hearing having also been rejected.

---