← Library
High Court Of ChhattisgarhREVP/46/2021rejected

Vice Chancellor, Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma Open University, v. Veena Singh

2021-03-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy3 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVP No. 46 of 2021

1. Vice Chancellor, Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh

2. Registrar Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ---- Petitioners

Versus

1. Veena Singh W/o Rahul Singh Aged About 33 Years R/o Near H. D. F. C. Bank, Behind Narendra Yadav House, Village And Post Birkona Police Thana Koni, Tahsil And District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh ......(Petitioner)

2. State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Secretary, General Administration Department, Mahanadi Bhawan Mantralaya, Naya Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh ......(Respondent No. 01)

3. Deceased (Shilkant Tiwari) Through L. R.S Smt. Sukrita Rani Tiwari Aged About 36 Years Working As Peon In Examination Office, Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma, Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 04)

4. Hardeep Sahu S/o Alakharam Sahu Aged About 37 Years Working As Peon In Confidential Department, Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma, Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 05)

5. Deceased (Mohd. Imran) Through L. R.S Smt. Sabiha Khan Aged About 33 Years Working As Peon In Education Department, Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma, Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 06)

6. Smt. Nanda Raikwar D/o Prahlad Raikwar Aged About 38 Years Working As Peon In Reception Department, Under Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma, Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 07)

7. Rohit Kumar S/o Buddhu Singh Aged About 29 Years Working As Peon In Examination Department, Under Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma, Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 08)

8. Deceased Ramsahai Porte Since Dead Through L. R. S, Smt. Sunita Porte, W/o Ramsahai Porte Aged About 35 Years Working As Peon In R. D. Department, Pandit Sunder Lal Sharma, (Open) University, Koni Birkona Marg, Bilaspur District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 09)

9. Dhan Singh Markam S/o Shri Baiyaram Markam Aged About 40 Years R/o Nehru Chowk, Near Judev Singh Banglo, Vice Chancellor, R/o Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma, Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 10) 10.

Rajesh Uikey S/o Shri Radheshyam Uikey Aged About 35 Years Working As Peon In Press Department, Pt. Sunder Lal Sharma, Open University, Koni Birkona Marg, District Bilaspur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 11)

11.

Laxmi Kant Yadav S/o Shri Jethuram Yadav Aged About 36 Years R/o Devendra Nagar, Near Hanuman Timber, Sector-2, Raipur District Raipur Chhattisgarh (Respondent No. 12) ----Respondent For Petitioner :

Shri H. B. Agrawal, Sr. Adv along with Shri Pankaj Agrawal, Adovcate.

For State :

Shri Rahul Jha, G.A.

For Respondents :

Shri Prateek Sharma, Advocate.

Hon'ble Shri Justice P. Sam Koshy Order on Board 23/03/2021

1. The present review petition has been filed seeking review of the order passed by this Court on 05.01.2021 passed in WP(S) No. 6693/2014.

2. From the available materials that has been brought along with the review petition, this Court finds that all these materials were already within the knowledge and notice of the review-petitioners at the time of hearing of the writ petition itself further no such grounds were raised in the reply filed by them.

3. Given the said facts, this Court does not find any strong case made out calling for a review of the order dated 05.01.2021. Moreover, the grounds which have been raised by the applicants also are not the grounds which would be permissible under the Review jurisdiction of this Court, where the settled position of law is that a review petition would be sustainable only in the event of there being an error apparent on the face of records and which the applicants herein have failed miserably to show an error apparent on the face of records so as to review the order dated 05.01.2021.

4. Accordingly, the review petition being devoid of merits stands rejected.

Sd/- (P. Sam Koshy) Judge Jyotijha