Dharam Deo Narayan
Singh Vs. State of Jharkhand & Ors.  INSC 788 (17 April 2009)
IN THE SUPREME COURT
OF INDIA CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CIVIL APPEAL NO.2630 OF 2009 (Arising out
of SLP(C) No. 21497 of 2006) Dharam Deo Narayan Singh ..........Appellant
Versus The State of Jharkhand & Anr. ........Respondents
appellant calls in question the correctness or otherwise of the judgment and
order passed in L.P.A. No. 257 of 2003 dated 3/10.8.2004 and the order passed
in Civil Review No. 100 of 2004 dated 4/6.12.2005.
appellant aggrieved by the rejection of the claim by the learned Single Judge
in counting the service rendered by him earlier in the co-operative
institution, had filed Letter Patent Appeal before the High Court of Jharkhand
at Ranchi in L.P.A. No. 257 of 2003. By the 1 impugned order dated
3/10.8.2004, the court has rejected the appeal.
After such rejection,
the appellant had filed Review Petition No. 100 of 2004. Alongwith the
Petition, the appellant had produced circular instruction issued by the
Government of India, Ministry of Human Resources Development, Department of
Education, New Delhi and other documents, which according to him, would support
his claim made before the authorities and also before the court.
Review Petition was rejected by the court on the ground that there was no error
apparent on the face of the record and, therefore, review of the order passed
in L.P.A. No. 257 of 2003 was not called for.
The grievance of the appellant and his counsel before us, is that; if the
documents produced by the appellant had been considered by the court, it would
have certainly helped the appellant to claim higher pensionary benefits.
learned counsel for the respondents justifies the impugned order.
considered the rival claims of the parties, in our view, in order to do
complete justice, we deem it proper to set aside the 2 order passed by the
High Court in Civil Review Petition without going into niceties of order 47
Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure.
we set aside the order passed by the High Court in Civil Review Petition No.
100 of 2004 dated 4/6.12.2005 and direct the High Court to reconsider the
Review Petition filed by the appellant by taking on record the circulars and
other documents filed along with the Review Petition as expeditiously as
possible within an outer limit of six months. We hasten to add, we have not
expressed anything on the merits of the claim of the appellant. The appeal is
disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.
[ TARUN CHATTERJEE ]
[ H.L. DATTU ]