2025:HHC:8588 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA CMP(M) No.2122 of 2024 in Review Petition No.12 of 2025 Decided on: 01.04.2025 Smt. Satvinder Kaur … Review Petitioner Versus Sh. Parveen Sharma & others … Respondents Coram Hon’ble Mr. Justice Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 ____________________________________________________ _ For the review petitioner: Mr. Rahul Mahajan, Advocate. For the respondents : Ms. Sulochana Rana, Advocate, Ajay Mohan Goel, Judge (Oral) CMP(M) No.2122 of 2024 In view of the averments made therein, present application, seeking condonation of delay in filing the review petition is allowed and disposed of. Review Petition No.12 of 2025 2. By way of this review petition, the review petitioner is seeking review of the judgment passed by this Court. 3. Learned counsel for the review petitioner has submitted that the directions given in the later part of the judgment by this Court, in terms whereof, the respondent-Board has been granted liberty to proceed with the matter as far as the private respondent, i.e. the present review petitioner is concerned in accordance with law 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2025:HHC:8588 is not in-conformity with the directions that were passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court in CWP No.665 of 2019, decided on 01.07.2019. 4. Having heard learned counsel for the review petitioner and having carefully gone through the judgment passed by this Court as well as the judgment passed by Hon’ble Division Bench of this Court, this Court is of the considered view that there is no error apparent as far as the judgment passed by this Court is concerned. 5. This Court consciously passed the directions as stood passed in judgment dated 30.05.2024, in CWPOA No.6905 of 2020 and in case the petitioner is aggrieved therewith, she obviously could have resorted to more which are available in the petition, however, no case for review is made out as this Court does not finds that there indeed any error apparent on the face of record. 6. Accordingly, as this Court does finds any error apparent on the face of record, the review petition is dismissed. Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, also stand disposed of. (Ajay Mohan Goel) Judge April 01, 2025 (Rishi)