Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:75917-DB Chief Justice's Court Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION No. - 158 of 2025 Applicant :- Union of India and 3 others Opposite Party :- Ram Dayal Yadav and 5 others Counsel for Applicant :- Pooja Agarwal Counsel for Respondent:- A.S.G.I. Hon'ble Arun Bhansali,Chief Justice Hon'ble Vikas Budhwar,J. 1. This review application has been filed by the petitioners in respect of order dated 06.09.2024 passed by this Court in Writ A No. 19333 of 2021. 2. Submissions have been made that the writ petition filed by the petitioners against the order dated 30.06.2021 passed by Central Administrative Tribunal, Allahabad Bench, Allahabad in Original Application No. 427 of 2021 was dismissed relying on order in Union of India and three others Vs. Shiv Balak and two others: Writ A No. 14527 of 2022 and other connected matters decided on 15.12.2022 whereby similar nature petitions filed by the Union of India were dismissed. 3. Now, it is submitted that Hon'ble Supreme Court had, on the day when the order was passed by this Court, granted interim order with regard to the implementation of judgement in Director (Admin. and H.R.) KPTCL and others Vs. C.P. Mundinamani and others: AIR 2023 SC 1956 and the order dated 06.09.2024 has now been made absolute by Hon'ble Supreme Court on 20.02.2025, therefore, the order dated 06.09.2024 passed by this Court requires a review. 4. We have considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the petitioners and have perused the material available on record. 5. This Court, while deciding the writ petition, had relied on the order in the case of Union of India and three others Vs. Shiv Balak and two others: Writ A No. 14527 of 2022 decided on 15.12.2022 which was decided prior to the judgement in the case of Director (Admin. and H.R.) KPTCL (supra). The mere fact that subsequently order in the case of Director (Admin. and H.R.) KPTCL (supra), has been interpreted/clarified by Hon'ble Supreme Court, cannot be used for the purpose of seeking a review of the order passed by this Court. 6. Explanation to Rule (2) of Order XLVII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 reads as under: "Explanation—The fact that the decision on a question of law on which the judgment of the Court is based has been reversed or modified by the subsequent decision of a superior Court in any other case, shall not be a ground for the review of such judgment." 7. In view of express provision providing that merely on account of reversal or modification of an order by the subsequent decision of the superior Court, cannot be made a basis for seeking review, present review petition cannot be entertained, the same is, therefore, dismissed. Order Date :- 9.5.2025 Sandeep/A.Prajapati (Vikas Budhwar, J) (Arun Bhansali, CJ) Digitally signed by :- SANDEEP KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad