This civil review has been preferred against the judgment dated 7th April, 2003, delivered by the learned single Judge of this court in Second Appeal No. 21 of 2000(R).

2. I have heard party-in-person, who has mainly submitted that several errors have been committed by the learned single Judge and several factually incorrect statements have been made in the judgment. It was mainly submitted by the party-in-person that he was appointed in Delhi Public School not on ad hoc or temporary basis, but he was on probation. Further, he was appointed on the post of Grade-III Teacher and not on Grade-IV Teacher. His appointment was not at all temporary and appointment letter have not been issued by the authority with clean hands and that he is fully qualified for being appointed as a teacher in Grade-II. It has also been mentioned in the impugned order that party-in-person, not being a B.Ed., degree holder, is not entitled for appointment on the post in question, but according to the party-in-person, B.Ed., degree was not a prerequisite qualification for appointment on the post in question at the relevant time. He is also relying upon the following decisions:-

(i) Umesh Kumar Sharma vs. S