RP No. 24/2025 Page 1 of 2 Sr. No. 1 Suppl. Cause List. 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH AT SRINAGAR RP No. 24/2025 Mst. Rabiya Akhter …Petitioner(s)/Appellant(s) Through: Mr. Hamza Prince, Adv. with Ms Urba Naseer, Adv. Vs. Union Territory of JK & Ors. ...Respondent(s) Through: None CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJEEV KUMAR, JUDGE HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY DHAR, JUDGE O R D E R 15.05.2026 1. This is a review petition by the petitioner Rabia Akhterr seeks review of the judgment dated 1st of March 2025 passed by this court in WP (C) No. 3313/2023, whereby, this Court has dismissed the writ petition filed by the petitioner and upheld the judgment dated 29th of March 2023 passed by the Central Administrative Tribunal, Srinagar Bench [“the Tribunal”] in TA No. 4537/2021, titled Mst. Rabia Akhtar vs. State of J&K and Ors. 2. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the material on record, we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner has failed to make out a case for reviewing the judgment dated 1st of March 2025 supra. 3. Needless to say that a review of a judgment passed by the court can be sought primarily on the following three grounds: 1. Discovery of new evidence; 2. Error apparent on the face of record; 3. Any other sufficient reason. 4. It is not the case of the petitioner that some material or evidence has emerged after the passing of the judgment sought to be reviewed, which could not be produced at the relevant time despite exercising due diligence. It is also not the case of the petitioner that the judgment sought to be Mohd Altaf Nima I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.05.2026 RP No. 24/2025 Page 2 of 2 reviewed suffers from any error apparent on the face of record. No other sufficient cause which could be read ejusdem generis to the above two grounds has been demonstrated. 5. We have gone through the judgment dated 1st of March 2025 as also the judgment passed by the tribunal and we are of the considered opinion that the judgment does not suffer from any legal infirmity, much less from an error apparent on the face of record. 6. We find no merit in this review petition, the same is accordingly dismissed. (SANJAY DHAR) (SANJEEV KUMAR) JUDGE JUDGE SRINAGAR: 15.05.2026 Altaf Mohd Altaf Nima I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document 22.05.2026