WPSS/1734/2020
2022 Latest Caselaw 336 UK

                   Office Notes,
                reports, orders or
                 proceedings or
Sl. No   Date                                    COURT'S OR JUDGES'S ORDERS
                  directions and
                Registrar's order
                 with Signatures
                                     WPSS No.1734 of 2020
                                     Hon'ble Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.

Mr. K.K. Tiwari, Advocate, for the petitioner.

Mr. N.P. Shah, Standing Counsel, for the State of Uttarakhand.

Mr. Vinay Kumar, Advocate, for the review applicant.

This writ petition was decided by the coordinate Bench of this Court by the judgment dated 17.12.2020. In fact, the foundation of the judgment was based upon the earlier judgment of the coordinate Bench dated 15.11.2018, which was rendered in Writ Petition (S/S) No. 1172 of 2009.

If the observations, which were made in the judgment which has now been sought to be reviewed by the applicants, who were not the party to the writ petition, is taken into consideration, in fact it is rather based on a consensus which was extended by the Government Advocate, that the issue stands covered by the said judgment.

In that eventuality, where there is no contest on merits by the respondents, the Court was not at a mistake while passing the judgment dated 17.12.2020, based on the earlier judgment, hence there happens to be no apparent error on the face of the record.

The present applicant have filed the review application (MCC No.11029 of 2021) seeking a leave to file review application, and simultaneously it has been informed that in compliance of the aforesaid judgment which has been sought to be reviewed, the subsequent orders have been passed which has been put to challenge by the petitioners to the present writ petition in the separate writ petition being WPSS Nos.101 of 2022, 120 of 2022 and 114 of 2022.

This Court is of the view that the review application at the behest of the present applicants, would not be tenable for the reason being that (1) they were not the party to the writ petition and (2) there is no apparent error as such on the face of the order, because the coordinate Bench has rendered the judgment dated 17.12.2020, on the basis of the consensus extended by the Government Advocate.

Hence, I am not venturing into the review application. Accordingly, the review application, as well as the application for leave to file review application would stand rejected, but rejection of this review application will not preclude the review applicant to raise all the contentions in the pending writ petitions preferred by the petitioner.

(Sharad Kumar Sharma, J.) 22.02.2022

NR/