Page No.# 1/4 GAHC010066222026 undefined THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : Review.Pet./71/2026 DEBAJIT PHUKAN S/O. LEKHAN PHUKAN, RO VILL SOLAL GAON, PO PANI GAON, PS NORTH LAKHIMPUR, DIST LAKHIMPUR, ASSAM VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS. REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE 3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL SOUTHERN SECTOR CRPF ROAD NO 10C NEAR NEW MLA MP COLONY GAYATRI HILLS JUBILEE HILLS HYDERABAD 500033 TELENGANA STATE 4:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL POLICE GROUP CENTRE CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE CRPF YELAKANKA BANGALORE KARNATAKA 5:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL (MEDICAL) MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT COMPOSITE HOSPITAL CRPF AVADI CHENNAI Page No.# 2/4 6000 Advocate for the Petitioner : MR P R SARMA, A ISLAM Advocate for the Respondent : DY.S.G.I., MR. B DEKA(C.G.C.)R-ALL Linked Case : WA/22/2026 DEBAJIT PHUKAN S/O LEKHAN PHUKN R/O VILL SOLAL GAON P.O. PANI GAON P.S. NORTH LAKHIMPUR DIST. LAKHIMPUR ASSAM. VERSUS THE UNION OF INDIA AND 4 ORS REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF HOME NEW DELHI. 2:THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE 3:THE INSPECTOR GENERAL SOUTHERN SECTOR CRPF ROAD NO 10C NEAR NEW MLA MP COLONY GAYATRI HILLS JUBILEE HILLS HYDERABAD 500033 TELENGANA STATE. 4:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE GROUP CENTRE CENTRAL RESERVE POLICE FORCE CRPF YELAKANKA BANGALORE Page No.# 3/4 KARNATAKA. 5:THE DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL (MEDICAL) MEDICAL SUPERINTENDENT COMPOSITE HOSPITAL CRPF AVADI CHENNAI 600065 ------------ For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. P.R. Sarma, Advocate. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. B. Deka, Central Government Counsel. – B E F O R E – HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. ASHUTOSH KUMAR HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE ARUN DEV CHOUDHURY 04.06.2026 (Ashutosh Kumar, CJ) We have heard Mr. P.R. Sarma, learned Advocate for the petitioner, and Mr. B. Deka, learned Central Government Counsel for the respondents. The petitioner has questioned the judgment dated 27.02.2026, passed by this Court in WA No. 22/2026 on the ground that this Court did not take into account that a private hospital, though of course of repute, had opined that the petitioner, though had been suffering from grave disorder, but was fit to resume his duties. The judgment is sought to be reviewed on the further ground that this Court ought to have considered the precedent in Ravinder Kumar Dhariwal & Anr. -Vs- Union of India & Ors, a judgment of the Supreme Court passed in Civil Appeal No.6924/2021, wherein it has been held that in case Page No.# 4/4 an employee suffering from illness shows an improvement, it would be better if the employer explores the possibility of an alternative arrangement for him. Both the arguments were taken into account while hearing the appeal and it was found that in view of the serious disorder of the petitioner, the employer chose to invalidate his service by keeping his health situation under Shape-5(P). This Court did not explore the possibility of any alternative accommodation for the petitioner in any non-combatant position only for the reason of the long passage of time since his services had been invalidated. Even otherwise, no good ground has been made out for reviewing the judgment dated 27.02.2026. What the petitioner intends is a re-hearing and re-appreciation of the facts of the case, which is not permissible under the review jurisdiction. Considering this aspect of the matter, we find no merit in this petition. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed. JUDGE CHIEF JUSTICE Comparing Assistant