JUDGMENT

Sanjay Karol, A.C.J. - Shri Chet Ram, the present review petitioner, who was not a party to the original writ petition, seeks review of the judgment dated 4.1.2018, passed in CWP No.2135 of 2016, titled as Gram Panchayat, Thunag vs. State of H.P. & others, whereby Notifications, issued by the Chief Secretary to the Government of Himachal Pradesh, dated 27.06.2016 (Annexure P-9), creating a new SubDivision (Civil), known as "Janjehli" by re-organizing certain areas of Tehsil Thunag and Tehsil Bali Chowki, and dated 21.4.2016 (Annexure P-10), creating a Sub-Tehsil at Chhatri, stand quashed.

2. Facts, leading to filing of the present Review Petition, briefly, are stated as under.

3. Gram Panchayat, Thunag, filed a writ petition, being CWP No.1272 of 2016, titled as Gram Panchayat, Thunag & another vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others (referred to as the first petition). In the said petition, review petitioner filed an application under Order 1 Rule 10 of the Code of Civil Procedure (CMP No.4977 of 216), which was allowed and he was ordered to be impleaded as a party.

4. While disposing of such petition on 12.7.2016, the Court, holding the petition to be premature, took note of the averments made by the State to the effect that "it is submitted that while opening new Govt. Offices at any place all aspects are being kept in mind and no unilateral decision or proposals are being taken. However, it is submitted that no notification has been issued by the Govt. about the functioning of Sub Divisional Office (C) at Janjehli, so far" and "In this context it is submitted that no notification has been passed by the Himachal Pradesh Govt. so far regarding opening of new SDM cum SDO (C) office at Thunag or Janjehli. So the question of unilateral decision to open this office does not arise at all".

5. Subsequently, on 10.8.2016, the very same writ petitioner filed another petition, being CWP No.2135 of 2016, titled as Gram Panchayat, Thunag vs. State of Himachal Pradesh & others (referred to as the second petition), assailing the notifications dated 27.6.2016, creating a new Sub-Division (Civil) at Janjehli and dated 21.4.2016, creating a Sub-Tehsil at Chhatri, which petition was allowed vide judgment dated 4.1.2018, subject matter of the present review petition.

6. Before we record and deal with the respective submissions made by the learned counsel, we deem it appropriate to notice the averments made by the parties, in their respective pleadings, so filed in the instant review petition.

7. The review petitioner sets out himself to be an agriculturist and a person actively remaining in public domain, holding several public offices. In paragraph-12 of the review petition, it stands averred that decision of the Government in establishing the office of SDO (C) at Janjehli was based on valid consideration, also with resultant effect thereof, being (a) central geographical location; (b) existence of 31 Government offices; (c) suitability for the purposes of civil administration; (d) smooth functioning of the office for about one and a half year; (e) registration of more than 400 vehicles/issuance of equal number of driving licences; (f) conduct of Assembly Elections of Seraj Constituency; (g) despite Seraj Constituency being a hilly and snowbound area, connectivity to Janjehli remained unobstructed, save and except for 3-4 hours during heavy snowfall; (h) better bus connectively; (i) topographical advantage of future expansion; (j) larger number of commercial establishments; (k) holding of District level ''Kuthah Fair'' and close proximity of famous ''Shikari Devi Mata Temple'', drawing tourists and devotees in huge number. Also, in paragraph-13 of the review petition, it stands averred that non-impleadment of the review petitioner as a party, in the light of order passed in the first petition itself, is an error apparent on the face of record.

8. The writ petitioner, with vehemence, controverts such averments by inter alia averring th