Vikram Singh Chauhan vs State Of U.P. And 3 Others
2022 Latest Caselaw 1195 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

Reserved on :- 31.03.2022 
 
Delivered on :-  12.04.2022 
 
Case :- WRIT - A No. - 30401 of 2016
 

 
Petitioner :- Vikram Singh Chauhan
 
Respondent :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others
 
Counsel for Petitioner :- Awadh Behari Singh,Manish Singh
 
Counsel for Respondent :- C.S.C.
 

 
Hon'ble Siddharth,J.

Order on Civil Misc. Review Application No. 2 of 2018

1. Heard Sri Awadh Behari Singh, learned counsel for the review-applicant and learned Standing Counsel for the State-respondents.

2. This review application has been filed by the learned counsel for the petitioner/review-applicant praying for review of the order dated 30.01.2018 passed by this Court in view of subsequent judgement of Full Bench in the case of Km. Kalyani Mehrotra Vs. State of U.P. through Principal Secretary, Rural Development, Lucknow and Others passed in Service Single No. 14930 of 2017, wherein it has been held that the provisions of U.P. Recruitment of Dependants of Government Servants Dying in Harness Rules, 1974, would be applicable to employees of District Rural Development Agency. This Court in the judgement under review held otherwise.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that apart from the abovenoted Full Bench judgement of this Court, there is error apparent on the face of record of the judgement of this Court since Clause 10 of the Government Order dated 17.03.1994 has not been properly considered by this Court.

4. This Court finds that the first submission of the petitioner that on account of subsequent judgement passed by Full Bench of this court, the judgement of this Court should be reviewed, is not in accordance with law. The reliance on the judgement of this Court in the case of Dayal & Another Vs. Sanjeev Batra and another, 2021 (12) ADJ 88 (LB) is not on the question of review of the earlier judgement on account of subsequent judgement of the Full Bench upholding the argument of the counsel for the petitioner/review-applicant.

5. The second submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that paragraph no. 10 of the Government Order dated 17.03.1994 has not been properly considered by this Court, which is incorrect. The judgment of this Court dated 30.01.2018 has taken note of the aforesaid paragraph no. 10 of the Government Order and has decided the same after hearing the contentions of the learned Standing Counsel that District Rural Development Agency is a Society registered under the Societies Registration Act and the sanctioned staff of the Society are not governed by rules framed under Article 309 of the Constitution of India.

6. In view of the above consideration, no ground for review of the order has been made by the learned counsel for the review-applicant.

7. The review application is accordingly, dismissed.

Order Date :- 12.04.2022

KS