Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.
1 / 3
2025:CGHC:22900
NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 126 of 2025 1 C.L. Patel S/o Hirday Narayan Patel Aged About 60 Years R/o Village Bendarkona, Tahsil And District - Korba Chhattisgarh (Mentioned As C.L. Patel, Posted As Lecturer, Govt. Higher Secondary School, Kanki, Block - Kartala, Distt - Korba Chhattisgarh In The Order) Presently Working As In- Charge Principal, Government Higher Secondary School, Kanki, Block- Kartala, Distt - Korba Chhattisgarh
... Applicant(s) versus 1 State Of Chhattisgarh Through Its Secretary, School Education Department, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Distt - Raipur Chhattisgarh 2 Director Directorate Of Public Instruction, Indrawati Bhawan, Nava Raipur, Distt - Raipur Chhattisgarh 3 District Education Officer Korba, Distt - Korba Chhattisgarh 4 B.N. Yadaw S/o Late Mayaram Yadaw Aged About 57 Years Posted As Lecturer Government Higher Secondary School Kanki Block Kartala District Korba Chhattisgarh
... Respondent(s) (Cause title is taken from Case Information System) For Petitioner : Mr. R.S. Baghel, Advocate through V.C. For Respondents/ State : Mr. U.K.S. Chandel, Dy. A.G. For Respondent No. 4 : Mr. Ghanshyam Kahsyap, Advocate JYOTI SHARMA Digitally signed by JYOTI SHARMA Date: 2025.06.10 18:04:20 +0530
2 / 3 (HON’BLE SHRI JUSTICE BIBHU DATTA GURU) Order on Board 10/06/2025
1. The review petitioner (Respondents No.4 in WPS No.1180/ 2025) seeks review of the order dated 07.05.2025 passed in WPS No. 1180 of 2025. 2. The main ground raised by the review petitioner is that during the course of hearing the writ petition he could not appear owing to some misunderstanding and during his absence the order, which is sought to be reviewed, herein has been passed. 3. On going through the record of the writ petition, it is apparent that the writ petition was firstly listed on 13.02.2025 on the said date notice was issued to the respondent No. 4 (review petitioner) thereafter the matter was listed on 29.04.2025. In the meanwhile, the review petitioner has filed his vakalatnama in the writ petition on 08.03.2025. Thereafter, the matter was listed on 07.05.2025. During the period of 2 months i.e. from March to May the review petitioner has not taken single step to file the reply to the writ petition and all of a sudden in the present review petition he has taken a plea that without affording due opportunity of hearing the writ petition has been decided. 4.
From bare perusal of the order passed in the Writ Petition, which is sought to be reviewed herein, it is apparent that this Court had decided the writ petition on merits and that too after appreciating the merits of the case. 5. There is no other ground pointed out by the Review Petitioners showing any manifest error on the record. It is well settled principles of law that the review proceedings are not by way of an appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order 47 Rule 1 of the
3 / 3 Code of Civil Procedure. Even in exercise of review jurisdiction by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, the review petitioners have not produced any ground for review. 6. It appears that the Review Petitioner by presenting of this review petition seeks an opportunity to argue the entire case afresh on merits under the garb of the review petition, which is not permissible and tenable in law. 7. It is well settled principle of law that under the garb of review petition, the Review Petitioners should not be permitted to argue the entire case afresh, which would amount to convert the review petition into an appeal and the same is not sustainable in law. {See: Meera Bhanjan v. Smt. Nirmal Kumar Chowdhary, AIR 1995 SC 455, Lily Thomas etc. v. Union of India and others, AIR 2000 SC 1650, Ajit Kumar Rath v. State of Orissa and others, AIR 2000 SC 85, Government of T.N. & Others v. M. Ananchu Asari and others, (2005) 2 SCC 332, and Kerla State Electricity Board v. Hitech Electrothermicsm & Hydropower Ltd. and others, (2005) 6 SCC 651}. 8. Accordingly, the Review Petition is rejected. Sd/- (BIBHU DATTA GURU)
JUDGE Gouri/ Jyoti