I.A. Ansari, J.

1. Heard Mr. K.P, Pathak, learned senior counsel, appearing for the review applicants, assisted by Mr. S. Sarma, and Mr. N. Dutta, learned senior counsel, appearing for the writ petitioners-opposite parties, assisted by Mr. P.N. Goswami.

2. These review petitions, namely, Review Petition Nos. 116/2003, 117/2003, 118/2003, 119/2003, and 120/2003, which seek to get reviewed the orders, dated 27.1.2003, passed in Writ Petition (Civil) Nos. 458(AP)/2001, 397(AP)/2001, 398(AP)/2001, 483(AP)/2001, 498(AP)/2001 respectively, have been resisted at the threshold on the ground of maintainability of the review petitions by the writ petitioners-opposite parties herein.

3. The maintainability of the present set of review petitions has been challenged, in a nut-shell, on two grounds. It is, first, contended by Mr. N. Dutta, learned senior counsel, that Rule 6 of Chapter-X of the Gauhati High Court Rules requires that either the applicant, who presents the review application, or his Advocate shall give certificate as provided by Rule 4 of the said Rules and Rule 4 required that every application for review of the judgment shall be presented to the stamp reporter, who will cer