Madhya Pradesh High Court
The State Of Madhya Pradesh vs Hina Kausar on 17 September, 2025
Author: Vijay Kumar Shukla
Bench: Vijay Kumar Shukla
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27110
1 RP-1572-2025
IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
AT INDORE
BEFORE
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
ON THE 17th OF SEPTEMBER, 2025
REVIEW PETITION No. 1572 of 2025
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS
Versus
HINA KAUSAR AND OTHERS
Appearance:
Shri Rajwardhan Gawde - G.A for the applicant/State.
Shri Chandrakant Verma - Advocate for the respondent No.1.
Shri Bharat Yadav - Advocate for the respondent No.4.
ORDER
The present petition is filed seeking review of the order dated
13/8/2024 passed in W.P No.5271/2024. By the said order, this Court
quashed the order dated 14/8/2023 passed by District Education Officer
rejecting the claim of the writ petitioner for compassionate appointment and
directed for reconsideration of the case of the writ petitioner for
compassionate appointment under clause 5.4 of the GAD Circular dated
29/9/2024.
The present review petition is filed on the ground that the writ
petitioner/respondent No.1 was not an employee of the government but was
an employee of the municipal council/respondent No.2.
Counsel for the writ petitioner submitted that after the disposal of the
said petition, the applicant/State has filed an application I.A No.1211/2025
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27110
2 RP-1572-2025
for recall and modification of the order dated 13/8/2024 on the ground that
the directions be issued to the respondent No.4 instead of respondent No.3.
This Court considered the said application and found that no reason has been
assigned in the application that why the direction should be issued to the
Municipal Council. The said application for recall or modification filed by
the applicant was dismissed on 11/8/2025. The review petition has been filed
after the said order.
The respondents argues that the review petition is not maintainable in
view of the order dated 11/8/2025 as the application for recall/modification
has already been rejected.
After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering that the
applicant, for review, had already filed an application for recall/modification
of the order dated 13/8/2024 on the same ground and the same has already
been rejected. Upon perusal of the record of the writ petitioner, this Court
finds that in the reply filed by the applicants in the writ petition, it was not
stated that the writ petitioner was an employee of the local body and not of
the State Government. It is for the first time in the review application, the
aforesaid stand has been taken. Therefore, the same cannot be basis for
review of previous orders.
A reference may be made to the judgments passed by the Supreme
Court in the case of Kamlesh Verma Vs. Mayawati reported in 2013 (8) SCC
320, wherein it is held that the review proceedings are not by way of an
appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order 47
Rule 1 CPC and Aribam Tuleshwar Sharma VS. Arbibam Pishak Sharma
NEUTRAL CITATION NO. 2025:MPHC-IND:27110
3 RP-1572-2025
reported in 1979 (4) SCC 389 , wherein the court clarified the ambit of the
review jurisdiction and held that a decision cannot be reviewed merely
because it is erroneous on merits, since that would fall squarely within the
province of a court exercising appellate jurisdiction.
In view of the aforesaid, I do not find any error apparent on the face of
record warranting any interference in exercise of Review Petition. It is well
settled that cases are heard and decided only once. To make departure from
this statutory rule, the revision application must strictly fall within the
established parameters. In light of settled principles of law, my considered
opinion is that there is no merit and substance in the review petition as in a
review, the Court has very limited power circumscribed by definitive limits.
Even after elaborate arguments, no error apparent on the face of record could
be pointed out.
Accordingly, present Review petition stands dismissed.
(VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA)
JUDGE
PK
