IMPORTANT POINT
The power of review can be exercised to correct mistakes but not to substitute a view, and a bona fide mistake by an advocate can justify a review.

JUDGMENT :

(Debangsu Basak, J.) :

1. Appellants have assailed the judgement and order dated March 27, 2024 passed by the learned Single Judge in

RVW 84 of 2024 filed in WPA 9428 of 2021.

2. By the impugned judgement and order the learned Single Judge has allowed the review petition and reversed its original decision dated February 12, 2024 passed in WPA 9428 of 2021. Initially, learned Single Judge had allowed the writ petition by its judgement and order dated February 12, 2024. On review, learned Single Judge has reversed its decision dated February 12, 2024 and dismissed the writ petition.

3. Learned senior advocate appearing for the appellants has submitted that, the appellants as writ petitioners prayed for fixation of their basic pay at par with other Junior Engineering Assistants-IV with effect from the respective dates of joining and consequential benefits, in the writ petition. He has referred to the prayers made in the writ petition. He has submitted that, such writ petition had been allowed by the judgement and order dated February 12, 2024. No new material or fact had been brought on record for a review to be sustained. He has referred to the review petition and contended that, only three documents were sought to be brought on record in the review petition. The affidavit in opposition filed in the main writ petition had alluded to such documents. Such documents had been in the control and custody of the review applicants. Review applicants did not produce those documents before the writ court at the hearing of the writ petition.

4. Learned senior advocate appearing for the appellants has submitted that, powers of review are circumscribed by the provisions of Order 47 Rule 1 and Section 114 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. Principles enunciated under such provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 should be applied by a writ court while deciding a review petition. According to him, the review applicants had failed to establish any ground analogous to those specified in Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 before the learned Single Judge. Therefore, according to him, the review petition was not maintainable and that the learned Single Judge erred in allowing the review petition. In support of his contention, he has relied upon AIR 2020 SC (Supp) 1017 (Ram Sahu vs. Vinod Kumar Rawat and Others).

5. Learned senior advocate appearing for the appellants has submitted that, all the appellants had been appointed pursuant to a selection process undertaken by the advertisement bearing Advt. No. PH/R/01/2019. The oil company has appointed a number of persons pursuant to such advertisement from time to time. The oil company has granted one financial package for persons appointed pursuant to such advertisement up to October 3, 2019. Persons appointed pursuant to the same advertisement subsequent to October 3, 2019 have been granted a lesser pay. He has contended that, the grant of a higher pay to persons appointed for the period from January 1, 2017 till October 3, 2019 pursuant to the same advertisement was de hors the Memorandum of Settlement dated October 3, 2019. In any event, such treatment of employees of the same cadre differently with regard to pay and emoluments was discriminatory and violative of Articles 14 and 16 of the Constitution of India.

6. Learned Senior advocate appearing for the appellants has drawn the attention of the Court to the impugned judgement and order. He has contended that, the learned Single Judge had taken into consideration three documents which were not submitted along with the affidavit in opposition in the main writ petition. He has drawn the attention of the Court to the three documents which were sought to be produced by the review applicants in the review petition. He has contended that, none of those documents can be construed to be a valid settlement of industrial disputes between the workers and management of the oil company concerned. Consequently, the contents