Back
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
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.
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.
Review petitions should demonstrate an apparent error on the face of the order being challenged, rather than challenging the order on its merits.
Tribunal's decision to dismiss a case without hearing the parties and considering relevant pleadings may be inappropriate and subject to revival upon court's direction.
The court's decision emphasized the importance of following the appropriate legal procedure, granting liberty to the petitioners to seek review through the Tribunal.
The court has the power of judicial review in disciplinary proceedings and can set aside orders if they are not in accordance with the law.
The court emphasized the importance of a discussion on merits in the adjudication of the matter and the need for both sides to have the opportunity to present their respective stands before the Tribu....
Point of Law : Order 47 Rule 1 CPC, which reads as Application for review of judgment.
The appointment of the last selectee to the post shall be subject to the outcome of the Original Application.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
