State of Chhattisgarh vs Sujan Singh Kanwar and Others

Hon''ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J.—The instant review petition has been filed by the State/applicant seeking review of the order dated 10.03.2010 passed by this Court in W.P. (S) No. 2214 of 2008 (Sujan Singh Kanwar & 27 others v. State of Chhattisgarh & Another) wherein the writ petition filed by the respondent No. 1 to 28, herein, was allowed.

There is a delay of 537 days in preferring this review petition for which, the applicant has filed an application for condonation of delay, reiterating the same grounds which appears to be the ground for review and further, that the applicant had sought withdrawal of the Writ Appeal No. 338/2011, preferred against the order dated 10.03.2010, with liberty to file this review petition. Thus, sufficient reasons have been shown. Delay is condoned.

The applicant/State seeks review of the order dated 10.03.2010 on the ground that there were certain lapses in the process of making Chhattisgarh Scheduled Tribe & Scheduled Caste Development (Gazetted) Service, Recruitment Rules, 2006 (for short `the Rules, 2006''). After publication of the Rules, 2006 in the State Gazette, the department initiated a process to remove the discrepancies in the Rules, 2006 which was initiated by the Additional Secretary of the Department, for necessary ratification and amendments in Schedule-I of the Rules, 2006. Accordingly, amendment was made and published in the State Gazette on 08.02.2011 (Annexure A/2). The Officer-in-Charge could not inform the Court about the process initiated by the department. Thus, the order dated 10.03.2010 requires review.

Having considered all the facts of the case, the grounds raised by the applicant/State cannot form the basis of review of the order dated 10.03.2010. Even, had this fact been informed to the Court that the process to amend the rules were initiated, that would not have made any difference as initiation of process in respect of amendment in the Rules, 2006 would have no meaning unless the rules are properly notified in the official gazette. Admittedly, in the case on hand, the rules were notified in the official gazette on 08.02.2011 and the order sought to be reviewed was passed on 10.03.2010. Thus, this review petition is without any merit.

Explanation to Rule 1 Order XLVI of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 provides that the review on the basis of the judgment of the Court which has been reversed or modified by the subsequent decision of the superior Court in any other case, shall not be a ground for review of such judgment. Likewise, amendment of the rule subsequently, shall not be a ground for review of the order.

Applying the well settled principles of review to the facts of the case, the applicant is seeking opportunity to argue the entire case afresh under the garb of review petition, which is not permissible and tenable in law. This review petition is in the nature of appeal which cannot be considered and decided by this Court.

Thus, the review petition, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed.