##PAGE1##

CM(cid:3)5856(cid:3)CWP(cid:3)2026 in/& (cid:3)1(cid:3)

RA(cid:3)CW(cid:3)195(cid:3)2026 in

CWP(cid:3)26431(cid:3)2018

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH

106 CM(cid:3)5856(cid:3)CWP(cid:3)2026 in/&

RA(cid:3)CW(cid:3)195(cid:3)2026 in

CWP(cid:3)26431(cid:3)2018

Date of Decision :24.04.2026

The Sirsa Central Cooperative Bank Ltd ...Petitioner

Versus

The Presiding Officer, Industrial Dispute

Tribunal(cid:3)cum(cid:3)Labour Court, Hisar and another ...Respondents

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARSIMRAN SINGH SETHI

Present: Mr. Sanchit Punia, Advocate

for the review(cid:24)applicant/respondent No.2.

* * *

(cid:1)(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:5)(cid:6)(cid:3)(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:5)(cid:7)(cid:10)(cid:11)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:12)(cid:13)(cid:11)(cid:5)(cid:14)(cid:8)(cid:15)(cid:16)(cid:8)(cid:17)(cid:18)(cid:3)(cid:2)(cid:19)(cid:20)

CM(cid:3)5856(cid:3)CWP(cid:3)2026

1. Present application has been filed for condonation of delay of

242 days in filing the present review application.

2. Keeping in view the averments made in the application, which

are duly supported by an affidavit, the application is allowed. Delay of days

242 in filing the present review application is condoned.

RA(cid:3)CW(cid:3)195(cid:3)2026

5. Present review application has been filed for the review of order

dated 10.07.2025 (Annexure A(cid:24)3) passed by this Court in CWP(cid:24)26431(cid:24)2018.

6. Learned counsel for the review(cid:24)applicant/respondent No.2

AARTI SHARMA

2026.04.24 17:08

I attest to the accuracy and

integrity of this document

CM(cid:3)5856(cid:3)CWP(cid:3)2026 in/& (cid:3)2(cid:3)

RA(cid:3)CW(cid:3)195(cid:3)2026 in

CWP(cid:3)26431(cid:3)2018

submits that the order dated 10.07.2025 (Annexure A(cid:24)3) passed by this Court

is incorrect insofar as denying the benefit of full back wages from the date of

demand notice which benefit was awarded by the Labour Court hence, the

said order may kindly be reviewed.

7. I have heard learned counsel for the review applicant and have

gone through the record with his able assistance.

8. It may be noticed that the jurisdiction of the Court in review is

very narrow and the same can only be exercised in case, any wrong fact has

been taken into consideration by the Court for arriving at a conclusion or

there is a discrepancy in facts. In the present case, the endeavour of the

learned counsel for the review(cid:24)applicant is to re(cid:24)argue the case so as to

convince this Court to arrive at a conclusion other than the one already

arrived at, which is not permissible.

9. Further, as per settled principle of law, an incorrect order can

only be challenged in an appeal and not in review petition. Reliance can be

placed upon the judgment of Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in (cid:21)(cid:5)(cid:22)(cid:5)(cid:19)

(cid:23)(cid:24)(cid:24)(cid:12)(cid:2)(cid:19)(cid:8)ti(cid:26)(cid:4)(cid:16)(cid:27)(cid:27)(cid:28)(cid:29)(cid:30)(cid:27)(cid:27)(cid:29)(cid:31)(cid:8)(cid:26) (cid:8)!(cid:31)!"(cid:8)(cid:13)(cid:5)(cid:13)(cid:19)(cid:12)#(cid:8)(cid:2)(cid:4)(cid:8)(cid:9)(cid:16)(cid:8)$%(cid:3)(cid:2)(cid:19)(cid:5)(cid:8)(cid:9)%(cid:7)#(cid:2)(cid:3)(cid:2)(cid:6)(cid:8)(cid:22)(cid:4)(cid:16)(cid:8)(cid:15)(cid:26)(cid:13)(cid:11)(cid:5)&(cid:2)(cid:5)

’(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:7)(cid:2)(cid:7)(cid:8)(cid:2)(cid:7)#(cid:8)(cid:26)(cid:13)(cid:11)(cid:12)(cid:3)(cid:4)(cid:8)#(cid:12)((cid:5)#(cid:12)#(cid:8)(cid:26)(cid:7)(cid:8)!)(cid:16)(cid:31)!(cid:16)!(cid:31)!". Relevant paragraph of the said

judgment is as under:(cid:24)

5.1 While considering the aforesaid issue two decisions of this

Court on Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 CPC are required

to be referred to? In the case of Perry Kansagra (supra) this Court

has observed that while exercising the review jurisdiction in an

application under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 CPC, the

Review Court does not sit in appeal over its own order. It is

observed that a rehearing of the matter is impermissible in law. It is

further observed that review is not appeal in d