21st July, 2026 (D/L No.10) Ct. No.4 (SKB) RVW 14 of 2026 Ashok Kumar Ray Versus The State of West Bengal and others Mr. Sukumar Ghosh, Ms. Moumita Ghosh … for the petitioner. Mrs. Chandreyi Alam, ld. AGP, Mr. Ravi Kumar Dubey … for the State. 1. Heard the learned advocate for the review applicant. The learned advocate for the applicant has tried to reargue the matter on merits. It is submitted that an application for V.R.S. was made and, therefore, the fact recorded in paragraph 2 of the order dated 06.11.2025 under review suffers from an error which is apparent from the face of the record. 2. On query, whether any relief was claimed in respect of an alleged claim for V.R.S., however, he is not in a position to show that any such relief was claimed. The filing of the review on such ground is, therefore, nothing but an exercise of futility. 3. As regards other submissions on merits, we are not inclined to entertain the same as if we are considering the order in an appellate jurisdiction. 2 4. The limits of a review jurisdiction are very settled. The same is confined to discovery of a new and important matter, evidence which, despite due diligence, was not within the knowledge or could not be produced, on account of an error apparent on the face of the record, or for such other reasons. 5. We do not find that any such case is made out in this review application. In fact, the attempt of the writ petitioner to reargue on merits is deprecated by this court as it is by now settled law that power of review cannot be confused as power of appeal and the court cannot reexamine the issue on merits. We refer two decisions of the Apex Court in this regard: 1) State of Telangana Vs. Mohd. Abdul Qasim (Dead) through Legal Representatives reported in (2024) 6 SCC 461 and 2) Shri Ram Sahu (Dead) through Legal Representatives and others Vs. Vinod Kumar Rawat reported in (2021) 13 SCC 1. 6. The review application is, thus, dismissed. (Madhuresh Prasad, J.) (Prasenjit Biswas, J.)