Allahabad High Court
Khushi Mehta vs State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. ... on 23 August, 2023
Bench: Rajesh Singh Chauhan
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:56242
Court No. - 4
(C.M. Application (IA) No.01 of 2023)
In Re:-
Case :- CIVIL MISC REVIEW APPLICATION DEFECTIVE No. - 176 of 2023
Applicant :- Khushi Mehta
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Education, Lucknow And 3 Others
Counsel for Applicant :- Shashank Shukla,Prachi Shukla
Hon'ble Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.
Heard learned counsel for the review petitioner on the appllication for condonation of delay in filing the instant review petition.
Cause shown in the affidavit is sufficient to condone the delay in filing the review petition.
On due consideration, the application is allowed. The delay in filing the instant review petition is condoned.
(Order on Review Petition No.176 of 2023)
Heard learned counsel for the review petitioner.
Learned counsel for the review petitioner has stated that in an order under review dated 07.07.2023 the reference of one writ petition bearing Writ-C No.5196 of 2023 has been given as that writ petition was also dismissed.
Attention has been drawn towards an order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in intracourt appeal bearing Special Appeal No.359 of 2023 (Himanshu Yadav vs. University of Lucknow and another) whereby the order passed in Writ-C No.5196 of 2023 has been assailed and the Division Bench of this Court has granted an interim order to the appellant/ writ petitioner of Writ-C No.5196 of 2023.
Learned counsel for the review petitioner has further stated that the provisions of eligibility for promotion rules had not been considered properly, therefore, the Writ-C No.5196 of 2023 was dismissed and on the basis of the aforesaid fact the writ petition of the present petitioner has been rejected. He has further submitted that since the Writ-C No.5196 of 2023 was rejected, therefore, learned counsel for the writ petitioner had not pressed her writ petition i.e. Writ-C No.5557 of 2023.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties and having perused the order dated 07.07.2023 passed by this Court in Writ-C No.5557 of 2023 as well as order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in intracourt appeal bearing Special Appeal No.359 of 2023, I do not find any legal ground to review the order dated 07.07.2023 passed in the writ petition of the review petitioner.
It is settled proposition of law by the Hon'ble Apex Court in catena of judgments that the scope of the review is very limited and unless & until an apparent error is pointed out in the judgment in question or any apparent illegality has been made, the order in question may not be reviewed. It has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Thungabhadra Industries Limited vs. Governor of Andhra Pradesh, AIR 1964 SC 1372, M/s. Northern India Caterers (India) vs. Lt. Governor of Delhi, (1980) 2 SCC 167 and in the case of Lily Thomas and others vs. Union of India and others, (2000) 6 SCC 224 that review cannot be an appeal in disguise to re-hear the matter. Similar view has been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Subhash vs. State of Maharastra, AIR 2002 SC 2537 as well as Rajendra Kumar vs. Rambhai, AIR 2003 SC 2095 and Haridas Das vs. Usha Rani Banki (Smt.) and others, (2006) 4 SCC 78.
Accordingly, the instant review petition is dismissed.
Consign to records.
However, it is always open for the review petitioner to file intracourt appeal seeking benefit of order dated 11.08.2023 passed by the Division Bench of this Court in Special Appeal No.359 of 2023.
[Rajesh Singh Chauhan,J.]
Order Date :- 23.8.2023
Suresh/
