The power of the Constitutional Court to recall its order/judgment is limited and should be exercised in exceptional and rare cases.

1. In terms of order No. 777 of 1999 dated 17-08-1999, issued by the Inspector General of Police (Armed), J&K, Srinagar, the petitioner (for short review petitioner), a Senior Grade Constable in the J&K Armed Police Force, suffered exit from the said force with effect from 02-04-1999, the date he had absented from duty. This order became subject matter of SWP 1460/99 and was quashed by the learned Single Judge by judgement dated 27-04-2005. The respondents were, however, given liberty to conduct enquiry in accordance with the rules. It was also provided that quashment of the order of dismissal shall not entitle the petitioner to claim back wages/pay/salary. The State, being aggrieved, challenged the judgement by medium of LPA No. 169/06. Appeal was accepted by the Letters Patent Bench of this Court and the judgement of the learned Single Judge was set aside and, consequently, writ petition filed by the review petitioner was also dismissed on 18-10-2007.

2. The review petitioner has prayed for review of the judgment of the Letters Patent Bench and for maintaining the judgment of the learned Single Judge passed in SWP 1460/99.

3. On notice issued, objections have been filed by the respondents.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the review petitioner.

5. Mr. Z. A. Qureshi, learned counsel for the review petitioner, submitted that the period of unauthorized absence from 14-09-1994 to 14-11-1994 was enquired into and the review petitioner was awarded censure and the period of his unauthorized absence aforementioned was treated as earned leave. On review filed, the Commandant, vide his order No. 608 of 1995 dated 16-06-1995, revoked the order of punishment to the extent of awarding censure but other part of the order was maintained. Learned counsel for the review petitioner also submitted that in terms of order No. 1161 of 1997 dated 29-09-1997, the review petitioner was promoted and appointed to the rank of Senior Grade Constable. The learned counsel further submitted that at the time of filing of the writ petition and during the pendency of the LPA, the copies of order NOs. 1506 of 1994 dated 24-12-1994 and 608 of 1995 dated 16-06-1995 were not in possession of the review petitioner and same are now brought on record of the review petition. The learned counsel further submitted that the review petition, in view of the aforementioned developments, which have taken place in the service career of the review petitioner, requires to be allowed and the judgment passed by the Letters Patent Bench recalled. He further submitted that the Letters Patent Bench has wrongly placed reliance on the judgments of the Supreme Court in case titled Kuldeep Singh Versus State of Punjab (1996) 10 SCC 659 and Farooq Ahmad Mir Versus State of J&K (2001) SLJ 182 as the facts in these cases and in the case of the review petitioner are, materially, different. He also submitted that this Court has all the powers to review its order/judgment when same is necessitated in particular facts and circumstances of a case. Learned counsel, in support of his contention, referred to and relied upon the judgement of the Supreme Court in case titled Board of Control for Cricket in India and another ' appellant versus Netaji Cricket Club ' respondent, reported in (2005) 4 SCC 741 and in case titled Rekha Mukerjee ' appellant versus Ashis Kumar Das and another ' respondent, reported in (2005) 3 SCC 427.

6. Human fallibility is an accepted reality of life. Human beings, being not perfect, their actions and renderings cannot be termed as infallible. Mistakes may be committed, so would require to be corrected. The process of correcting ones renderings cannot be based on exercise of an unbridled power. Human rationale and system's smooth functioning would require exercising of such power by fixing reasonable norms, as otherwise an uncertainty will be created and there will be no end to litigation. It is for this reason that norms fixed and criterion laid, for reviewing of