1 2026:CGHC:17053 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 90 of 2026 1 - Vijay Rameshwar Singh Maravi S/o Late Bahadur Singh Aged About 55 Years (Now Aged About 58 Years), Posted As Lab Technician, Resident Of Nutan Colony Quarter No. G-17, Sarkanda, P.S. Sarkanda, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) ... Petitioner(s) versus 1 - State Of Chhattisgarh Through- The Secretary, Veterinary Services, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 2 - The Director Directorate Of Veterinary Services, Ground Floor Block-3, Indravaty Bhawan, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) 3 - The Joint Director Veterinary Services, Bilaspur, District- Bilaspur (C.G.) 4 - The Secretary Government Of Chhattisgarh, Finance Department, Mantralaya, Atal Nagar, Nawa Raipur (C.G.) ... Respondents (Cause-title taken from the Case Information System) ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Petitioner :- Mr. Bharat Rajput, Advocate VISHAKHA BEOHAR Digitally signed by VISHAKHA BEOHAR 2 For State :- Mr. D.R. Minj, Dy. A.G. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SB- Hon'ble Shri Justice Amitendra Kishore Prasad Order On Board 15.04.2026 1. The present review petition has been filed seeking review/recall of the order dated 04.12.2025 passed in W.P.(S) No. 5895/2023. 2. The petitioner had earlier filed the aforesaid writ petition seeking direction to the respondent authorities to consider and decide his pending representation for grant of revised pay scale as per the recommendation of D.N. Tiwari Commission and for symbolic calculation of revised pay scale with effect from 01.01.1996. The said writ petition was disposed of by this Court vide order dated 04.12.2025 observing that the petitioner has already been extended the benefit of revised pay scale with effect from 01.01.1996 and, therefore, nothing survived for adjudication. 3. The petitioner has now filed the present review petition contending that the aforesaid observation is factually incorrect, inasmuch as the petitioner has only been granted time-bound pay scale benefits upon completion of 20 and 30 years of service by orders dated 12.07.2019 and 21.12.2023, and not the revised pay scale as per the D.N. Tiwari Commission with effect from 01.01.1996. It is further submitted that the petitioner had submitted representations (Annexure RJ/2) for symbolic fixation of pay from 01.01.1996, which, vide communication dated 15.02.2024 3 (Annexure RJ/3), was forwarded by the Joint Director, Veterinary Services, Bilaspur to the Joint Director, Treasury, Accounts & Pension, Bilaspur for consideration, but the same has not been decided till date. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there is an apparent error on the face of the record in the order dated 04.12.2025, as this Court proceeded on the premise that the benefit of revised pay scale had already been granted to the petitioner, whereas in fact no such benefit has been extended. It is further submitted that the grievance of the petitioner was limited to consideration of his pending representation, which still remains undecided. 5. Per contra, learned State counsel supports the earlier order but does not dispute that the representation of the petitioner, as referred to in communication dated 15.02.2024, is still pending consideration before the competent authority. 6. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 7. The scope of review jurisdiction is limited; however, it is well settled that where there is an error apparent on the face of the record or where a material fact has been overlooked, the Court would be justified in exercising its review jurisdiction. 4 8. In the present case, this Court, while passing the order dated 04.12.2025, proceeded on the basis that the petitioner has already been granted the benefit of revised pay scale with effect from 01.01.1996. From the material now placed on record, it is evident that the petitioner has only been granted time-bound pay scale benefits and not the specific benefit as per the recommendation of the D.N. Tiwari Commission from 01.01.1996, which forms the core grievance of the petitioner. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner’s representation, which was forwarded to the competent authority vide communication dated 15.02.2024, is still pending consideration. Thus, it is apparent that a material aspect of the matter, namely, the pendency of the petitioner’s representation and the actual nature of benefits granted, was not properly considered at the time of disposal of the writ petition. 9. In such circumstances, this Court is of the considered opinion that an error apparent on the face of the record has crept into the order dated 04.12.2025, warranting interference in review jurisdiction. 10. Accordingly, the review petition is allowed. The order dated 04.12.2025 passed in W.P.(S) No. 5895/2023 is hereby recalled. The respondent No. 3 — Joint Director, Treasury, Accounts & Pension, Bilaspur — is directed to consider and decide the petitioner’s pending representations (Annexure RJ/2), in light of communication dated 15.02.2024 (Annexure RJ/3), strictly in 5 accordance with law, by passing a reasoned and speaking order, within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. 11. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed any opinion on the merits of the petitioner’s claim. sd/- (Amitendra Kishore Prasad) Judge Vishakha