High Court Of ChhattisgarhREVP/154/2015dismmissedby circulation in chamber

Bhupesh Baghel v. State Of Chhattisgarh

2015-12-23Hon'Ble Shri Justice Manindra Mohan Shrivastava2 pages

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR REVP No. 154 of 2015 Bhupesh Baghel S/o Shri Nand Kumar Baghel, Aged About 54 Years R/o Man Sarovar Colony, Bhilai-3, Thana Old Bhilai, Tehsil Patan, District Durg, Chhattisgarh ......... (Petitioner) ---- Petitioner

Versus

1. State Of Chhattisgarh , Through Chief Secretary, Mantralaya, Mahanadi Bhawan, Raipur, Chhattisgarh

2. Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha, Through Chief Secretary, Secretariat, Vidhan Sabha Bhawan Raipur, Chhattisgarh

3. Shri Gauri Shankar Agrawal, Hon'ble Speaker, Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha, Speaker House, Shankar Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh ---- Respondents Petition for review (By Circulation in Chamber) Single Bench: Hon'ble Shri Manindra Mohan Shrivastava, J. (Order passed on 23.12.2015) Review of order dated 16.10.2015 is prayed for on the grounds that in the reply and objection to maintainability of the petition respondents submitted reply confining it to the interplay on Article 179, 181, 194 and 212 of the Constitution of India and interpretation of Rule 145 (1) & (2) of Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha Rules. It has been stated in the grounds that objection in relation to Rule 238 of Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha Rules was not specifically taken. There were

passing references and short submissions by counsel for respondent on the issue of maintainability of the petition with reference to Rule 238 and the petitioner was not given full opportunity to address the Court on the aforesaid aspect of maintainability of petition with reference to provision contained in Rule 238 of Chhattisgarh Vidhan Sabha Rules. It is also submitted that various additional documents submitted during arguments showing practice with regard to extension of session on the recommendation of Business Advisory Committee have also not been properly appreciated. Therefore, review has been prayed for. This Court after detailed hearing which continued for more than one day heard the counsel for the parties and passed the order. The Review petition is more in the nature of an appeal is disguise. No grounds for review are made out. Review petition is misconceived on law and facts both and therefore dismissed.

Sd/- (Manindra Mohan Shrivastava) J U D G E Rekha