Rajasthan High Court
Mukesh Sharma S/O Shri Deen Dayal ... vs The State Of Rajasthan ... on 6 February, 2023
Bench: Mahendar Kumar Goyal
[2023/RJJP/001815]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN
BENCH AT JAIPUR
S.B. Civil Review Petition No. 98/2022
In
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8231/2019
1. Mukesh Sharma S/o Shri Deen Dayal Sharma, Aged
About 34 Years, R/o Village Khatushyamji, Tehsil
Dantaramgarh, District Sikar. (Rajasthan)
2. Surendra Poonia S/o Shri Ramgopal Poonia, Aged About
34 Years, R/o Village Khatushyamji, Tehsil Dantaramgarh,
District Sikar (Rajasthan).
----Applicants/Petitioners
Versus
1. The State Of Rajasthan, Through Its Secretary Cum
Commissioner, Rural Development And Panchayati Raj,
Government Of Rajasthan, Secretariat Jaipur (Rajasthan).
2. District Collector, Sikar, (Rajasthan)
3. Chief Executive Officer, Zila Parishad, Sikar (Rajasthan)
4. District Education Officer, Elementary Education, Sikar
(Rajasthan)
5. Development Officer, Panchayat Samiti Dantaramgarh,
District Sikar (Raj.)
6. Principal, Govt. Adarsh Sr. Secondary School
Khatushyamji, Panchayat Samiti Dantaramgarh, District
Sikar (Raj.)
7. Gram Vikas Adhikari (Gram Sevak) Gram Panchayat
Khatushyamji, Panchayat Samiti Dantaramgarh, District
Sikar (Raj.)
----Respondents
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Tarun Jaiman
For Respondent(s) :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL
Judgment
06/02/2023
[2023/RJJP/001815] (2 of 3) [WRW-98/2022]
This review petition has been filed seeking review and
recalling of the order dated 02.12.2021 passed by this Court in
S.B. Civil Writ Petition No.8231/2019 whereby, the writ petition
was allowed and the respondents were directed to make the
payment of the due honorarium to the petitioners for the period
from 01.04.2018 till 22.04.2019.
Learned counsel for the review petitioners submits that the
writ petition came to be decided on the basis of concession
extended by their counsel confining the relief to the extent of
payment of due honorarium whereas, they have never instructed
the counsel to confine the relief to this extent. He, therefore,
prays that the review petition be allowed, the order dated
02.12.2021 be reviewed and recalled and the writ petition be
restored to its original number.
Heard. Considered.
The writ petition has been decided and allowed in terms of
submissions and prayer made by the learned counsel for the
petitioners during the course of arguments. At this stage, it is not
permissible for the petitioners to seek review of the order on the
premise that concession was extended by their counsel without
their instructions. Learned counsel for the petitioners could not
satisfy this court as to how with the change of the counsel, it is
permissible for a litigant to seek review of the order passed on
merits of the case taking into consideration the submissions
advanced by the learned counsels for the respective parties during
the course of the arguments. A Full Bench of the Hon'ble
Allahabad High Court has held in case of Namo Narayan Rai & Ors.
Vs. State of U.P. & Ors., MANU/UP/1013/2022 as under:
[2023/RJJP/001815] (3 of 3) [WRW-98/2022]
"18. Practice of filing of the review
application/petition by a different counsel, that
is by a counsel, who was not before the Court
when the matter was disposed of on merits, has
been deprecated by Hon'ble Supreme Court.
Reference in this regard can be made to the
judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of
Tamil Nadu Electricity Board and another vs. N.
Raju Reddiar and another, reported as
MANU/SC/0226/1997 : (1997) 9 SCC 736.
21.We are also of the opinion that in case
such a course adopted by the review
applicants/petitioners, while filing the review
petition is permitted, it may have the potential
of eroding the sanctity of the proceedings of the
Court and the statements which are made at the
bar during the course of proceedings and
arguments in a case by the learned counsel
representing the respective parties."
In view thereof, this Court finds no reason to review and
recall the order dated 02.12.2021. The review petition is
dismissed accordingly.
The pending application also stands disposed of.
(MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL),J
Sudha/39
Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)
