The court can review its judgment if a manifest wrong has been done and it is necessary to pass an order to do full and effective justice.

ORDER

This review petition under Section 114 read with Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure has been filed challenging the order dated 13.03.2023, passed in W.P. No.6833/2021 whereby, the writ petition was dismissed at the admission stage.

2. Brief facts of the case are that vide order dated 10.07.2014, passed by the respondents No.1 and 2, the lease deed executed for residential plot No.13 situated at Scheme No.47, admeasuring 12065 sq. ft. has been cancelled on the ground that the petitioner has violated certain terms and conditions of the lase deed by constructing commercial building on the residential plot. Therefore, the eviction proceedings were initiated and that the Rules known as "Madhya Pradesh Vikas Pradhikarno Ki Sampattiyon Ka Prabhandan Tatha Vyayan Niyam, 2018( hereinafter referred to as ...."Rules of 2018"), the petitioner is entitled to mitigate the dispute by applying for compounding for which provision was not available earlier.

3. Learned Senior Counsel for the review petitioner submitted that an error apparent on the face of the record has crept in the order dated 13.03.2023 holding that the said rules will have no applicability retrospectively on the ground that the lease deed was cancelled in the year 2014 and by no stretch of imagination the Rules of 2018 would be applicable in the case of the petitioner. No termination order was challenged. The prayer for deciding the representation was also rejected on the ground that the Rules of 2018 shall have prospective applicability. He further submitted that the respondents have concelaed the material fact Rule 22 of Rules of 2018 was amended w.e.f . 09.04.2021 which was not brought to the attention of this Court, therefore, the Court came to the conclusion that the Rules of 2018 would not have applicability retrospectively. Therefore, the order needs to be recalled in the interest of justice.

4. Per Contra, learned counsel for the respondent submitted that none of the grounds under Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC is available to renew/review the order. Further, the scope of review cannot be enlarged to such an extent taking the review to be an appeal. The jurisdiction of review can be exercised for correction of a mistake and not to substitute a view / reasoning so taken in the order/judgment sought to be reviewed. Mere possibility of two different views cannot be a ground for review. On these grounds, the review petition cannot be entertained so as to re-appreciate or re-hear the entire issue which was the subject-matter of the original writ petition.

6. The chart showing the statutory provisions occupying the field in respect of Un-amended and amended Rule 22 Clause (xi) which contemplates that the proceeding for revocation of cancellation of lease for reviving the lease can be done in cases where lease was cancelled "before" coming into effect of amended Rules i.e. 09/04/2021 provided the lease, the petitioner in this case, makes an application for revocation of cancellation of lease for its revival "within 180 days" from the date of amendment i.e. 09/04/2021. The Amended and Un- amended provisions are reproduced below :-

UN-AMENDED AMENDED w.e.f. 09/04/2021 22. Cancellation of lease and right of re-entry:- (1) If the lease holder violates the terms of the lease deed, then the following process will be adopted by the Authority. for cancellation. of the lease:-

(i)The Estate Officer on the violation of the terms of the lease deed shall issue a letter to the lease holder by registered post or email. The Estate Officer shall state the terms of the lease violated by the lessee and shall grant one month time to the lessee to comply with the terms of the lease. In case the lessee is not found the notice shall be affixed at the visible place of the property and a panchnama hall be prepared for the same.

(ii) If the violation continue