Laxmna Rao Navley vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2021 Latest Caselaw 2543 MP

                                   1                                  RP-278-2021
           The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                       RP-278-2021
           (LAXMNA RAO NAVLEY Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)


Jabalpur, Dated : 18-06-2021
      Heard through Video Conferencing.

      Shri Shambhu Prasad Jat, Advocate for the petitioner.
      Shri Ritwik Parashar, Govt. Advocate for the respondents/State.

This review petition has been filed seeking review of the order dated 16.3.2020 passed by Division Bench of this Court in W.A. No.1069/2017 by

which the appeal filed by the review petitioners was dismissed.

The Division Bench in the order under review held that the petitioner after rendering the services in the Public Works Department for a period of 10 years resigned from the post and thereafter he was appointed in the M.P. Land Army on purely temporary basis and the status in the Land Army always remained as temporary employee. In none of the orders passed by the State Administrative Tribunal, High Court or Supreme Court, the petitioner has been considered as a regular employee of the State Government. Reference was made to an order passed by this Court in W.P.

No.27018/2003, wherein this Court after given due consideration to the claim of the petitioner for absorption declined the same.

The Division Bench while dismissing the appeal apart from taking note of the observation made by this Court in aforementioned writ petition also referred to Rule 26 of the M.P. Civil Services (Pension) Rules, 1976 to hold that the resignation from a service or post would entail forfeiture of past service. Thus it would not entitle the review petitioner to any benefit of past service.

Learned counsel for the review petitioner has sought to argue the entire matter all over again. It is trite that rehearing cannot be granted under the guise of review. The petitioner has failed to point out any error apparent on the face of record so as to justify invocation of review jurisdiction of this Court. If in the perception of learned counsel for the petitioner the judgment suffers from 2 RP-278-2021 any illegality or otherwise wrong, he cannot submit any reason to maintain review petition.

Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed.

            (MOHAMMAD RAFIQ)                                   (ATUL SREEDHARAN)
             CHIEF JUSTICE                                              JUDGE


    Anchal
Digitally signed by
ANCHAL KHARE
Date: 2021.06.18
15:29:26 +05'30'