HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Review PeTiTion No.31 of 2009 i APPELLANTS 1. STaTe of Chha‘r‘risgarh, The Secrefury Deparfmen‘r of Educafion, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur‘ (C.€.) 2. The Direcfor Publiq Insfr‘uc’rion, Chha‘h‘isgarh Governmenf Raipur‘, Disf‘r. Raipur (6.6.) 3. The District Educafion Officer, District Janjgir‘ Champa (C.G.) Vs RESPONDENTS Achchhe Kumar Nugesh, Aged about 39 years, S/o Lm‘e Deriha Ram Nagesh, Upper Division Teacher, Governmen‘r Higher Secondary Schooi Nawagarh Block- Navagarh, Disf’r. Janjgir Champa (CG) O R D E R (In chamber) (Passed on t K6. 2009) Dhirendra Mishra, J: 1. The appellan’r—Sfa‘re and ifs officers have filed fhis applicafion and prayed for review of The order dafed 6.2.2009 passed by fhis Courf in W.P. (s) No.574/09. Appeiian’rs have also preferred an applicafion for condonai’ion of delay as fhe review peTifion has been preferred wii’h a delay of 31 days. . For The reasons indicaTed in The applicaTion daTed 08.04.2009 for condona'lion of delay, which is also supporfed by The offidavif of Shri B.L. Kurre, D.E.O., B‘ilaspur, fhe applicafion for condonafion of deloy is allowed and delay is condoned. If is seffled law fhaf fhe High Cour’r exercises power of review as a Courf of plenary jurisdicfion To prevenf miscarriage of jus’rice or To correcf grave and palpable errors commih‘ed by if. There are no definifive limi‘rs ’ro The exercise of The powers of review. The power of review may be exercised on The discovery of new and imporfanT maffer or evidence which, afTer The exercise of due diligence, was noT wiThin The knowledge of The person seeking The review or could noT be produced by him aT The Time when The order was made. IT may be exercised where some misTake or error apparenT on The face of The Mumw’ / ‘ record is found. However, The power is To be exercised wifhin The / \ Hmi‘rafions as provided under Secfian 114 read wifh Order 47 of fhe Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. . From perusal of The order under review and original record of W.P. (s)- No.574/O9, if is evidem‘ ’rho‘r offer hearing counsel for The pe‘ri’rioner as weii as The respondem‘s/Sfafe in demil fhe wrif pefi’rion was allowed, subjec’r fo oil verifica‘rions regarding The faci’s pleaded in The peTiTion. Various circuiars issued by The STaTe from Time To Time referred To in This applicaTion, were also broughT To The noTice of This CourT aT The Time of argumenT as is evidenT from reading of The order under review. In The considered opinion of This CourT, no any ground as menTioned in The review peTiTion is available To The appellanT—STaTe for review of The order daTed 6.2.2009. . Accordingly, The insTanT review peTiTion being wiThouT any subsTance deserves To be dismiSSed and is hereby dismisSed. ,A MW A ‘MW sdl’Mow ..... Roshan/— gbke“dxa 3ud%e