Back
2023 Supreme(Del) 4423
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
V. Kameswar Rao, Anoop Kumar Mendiratta, JJ.
Union of India & Ors. – Appellants
Versus
Sh. Om Prakash & Ors. – Respondents
W.P.(C) 3353 of 2021
Decided On : 09-05-2023
Important Points
Subject
Civil Law - Review Petitions
Headnote
Review Petition - Challenge to Order on Merits - The review petitioners sought review of an order, claiming that similar cases had been implemented in favor of the petitioners in those cases. The court found that the petitioner was essentially challenging the order on its merits and did not show any apparent error on the face of the order, leading to the dismissal of the review petition.
Fact of the Case:
The review petition was filed by the respondents seeking review of the order dated March 27, 2023.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner was essentially challenging the order on its merits and did not show any apparent error on the face of the order, leading to the dismissal of the review petition.
Issues: Challenge to the order on its merits
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the review petitioners were essentially challenging the order on its merits and did not show any apparent error on the face of the order, leading to the dismissal of the review petition.
Final Decision: The review petition is liable to be dismissed. It is ordered so.
Mr. Ripudaman Bhardwaj, CGSC with Mr. Rudra Paliwal, GP, for the Petitioner.
Mr.Amit Kumar, Advocate, for the Respondent.
JUDGMENT
V. Kameswar Rao, J. (Oral)
REVIEW PET. 129/2023
1. This is a review petition filed by the respondents seeking review of the order dated March 27, 2023.
2. The submission of learned counsel for the review petitioners is that in similar cases, the respondents have implemented the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal (`Tribunal', in short) in favour of the petitioners therein. In this regard, he has drawn our attention to orders passed in O.A.1868/2016 titled as Vijay Kumar Sharma & Others Vs. Vs. Union of India & Others read with O.A. 2693/2016 titled as Ranvir Singh Bhardwaj & Others vs. Union of India & Others and also W.P.(C)10367/2016 titled as R.N. Srivastava vs. Union of India and Ors.
3. We have seen the orders. On a specific query as to whether the terms of appointment were considered by the Tribunal/this Court in the judgments, the answer is in the negative.
4. We are of the view, in effect, the petitioner is challenging the order on its merits. No submission has been made to show that there is an apparent error on the face of the order of which review is sought.
5. The review petition is liable to be dismissed. It is ordered so.
