IN THE HON’BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR APPLICANT A%‘7§§;éaw “$ii;..w>\W VERSUS /’)' hl$ . A, Q/g 5C7C‘m Review Petiticn No. 9Q? of 2009 In w.P.(S) No. 6998/2008 Smt. Rambai Dansena, W/o Shailendra Dansena, aged about 30 years, R/o Village Sahajpali, Tahsil Baramkela, District-Raigarh (C.G.). (Respondent No. 6 in W‘P.(S) No‘ 6998/08) NON-APPLICANTS :1. State of Chhattisgarh Through : Secretary, Office of Women & Child Welfare D.K.S. Development, Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) Director Panchayat Raipur (C.G.) Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat Kanthipali, Tahsil-Baramkela, District—Raigarh (C.G.) Smt. Safed Sidar, W/o Shravan Sidar, aged about 24 years, R/o Village-Sahajipali, Baramkela, District—Raigarh (C.G.) (Petitioner in WP. (S) No. 6998/08) The Collector Raigarh District— Ralgarh (C.G.) Chief Executive Officer, Janpad Panchayat Baramkela, District— Raigarh (C.G.) 3%. HON‘BLE 5HRI DHIRENDRA MXEHRA 3" REVIEW PETITE 3N NO. 08 OF 2009 gmggicam 5mf. RaMbai Dansem, W/o Shailendm Damena aged abam 3O yews, R/o ViHage Sahajpaii, Tahsil Bammkela, DisWicf~Raigarh (CG) (Respanclem Nab m W.P.(s) No.6998/08) Memug Nawapplicawt's 1. 51'aJre 0‘? Chhaffiggawh, Thmugh Eacwafary, Office of Women & Chifd Walfare Deveicpman‘r, DKs ghawan, Raipur‘ (CG) Z. DirecTor, Panchaya’r Raipur' (C5) The Co“ ac‘ror‘, Raigarh, Disfr'ic’r Raigar‘h (C6) w 4. Chief Execu‘i'ive Officer, Janpad Panchaycd' Bammke la, DisTr'icJr Raigar‘h (CG) 5. Sarpanc‘n, 6mm Panchaya’r, Kamhipali, Tahsil Bammkala, DisTr‘ic‘r Raigarh (CG) 6. Smf. 3afed Sidar‘, W/o Shr‘cwan Sidar, aged abou‘t 124 years, R/o ViHage Sahajipali, Bammkeda, DisTr‘icT Raigarh (CG) (Perifioner in W.P.(§:) No.6998/Og) thamber Pmwed/‘ryg: 26. 02. é009 1) The applicam' has filed “h;he ins’rcm‘f appiicm‘ian for review 0f v The order dwed 15*” December, 2008 passed in WPCs) ‘ X ’ “J lwiNi‘n'd—éFIIVS I 1 ,"EOUW v \ JHHMU, wWf\ WW ; wmmwww§§§$§¥w W W WW W200 mmqahaqm Wwm mwiiwm $aifaqm NU.6998/08 (Annexum P/i), whereby The pefi‘rion filed by ”fhe respandem Naé Sm‘f. Safad Sidar‘ hcm been allowed and lhe arder‘ daleol 22.9.2OC8 passed by lhe Addllioml Collec‘lcw, Raigarh appomllng Sm‘l. Safecl Sldar' as Acmgcmbadl worker'o‘f Vlllage-Sahajpali, Gram Panchaya’r-Kam'hipali, has been reglclr'ed. 2) Thig peli‘lion has bmn filed on The gmumd Thm Sm‘l'. Safari Sidar ww n0? lhe hesldanl of Village-Sahqjpali cw har‘ name has ml beet/1 lncluded' in lhe volar’ lisl of 6mm Pahchayal‘ mL The lime of appoim‘mznl and she dld no‘l praduce sufficien‘r evidama abauf her marriage wllh Shmvcm as she did nol’ produce reglslmlion c‘erliflcafe of marriage. 3) Ii” is Seiiled law Thai a ir‘ibunal or“ Cour? may recall an order earlier made by i'i if (i) ’ihe proceeding culminai'ing in The arder euf'iers from inherehi lack of jurisdiciion, which is paien’r, (ii) fraudar callusian has heen used "l‘a obiaih‘ihe judgment (iii) “ihere hae been a misiake by ihe Cour‘i prejudieirig a ’par‘ry; or (iv) a‘ judgmeni hag been rendered in ignorance af ihe faci' WW W 200 WW vb (WE?) ‘M..mWmW..uWM.mWv‘WWM..W._._,W__W_._‘WM.M WW W01 arm ‘ ‘am‘rcw mm? 1?‘ fa”: wWaR 2 2%; aim 31m : $214 awiirria~~wf95 —~; x ,1 Mm» - ) ,nu. mm WW. 5% m 200 emmaafgaqu) mmm ‘g mmaifstém %?sfi%u3?r&w Hm? a necesswy parfy has n0? been served a"? uH 0r had died cmd “We S’mfe wa3 no‘f repr asemed. 4) Non—Mciusion 0f mme 0f Sim. Safed Sidar m ‘H’Le vo’rer lis“? hag atr‘eady bean corxsidemd wiHiie paggmg fhe arder' under review. The Acidifiam! Coklecfor‘, ‘Raigcxrh, an ’rhez basis of evidence available 0n record, has r‘ gMIy inferrea “ma? ‘rhe paiifioner' wag maw‘iad Ta c1 pewaan weaidam‘ of ViilaQwSahajpaii, fhar‘efor‘a, cm “facm, as aia‘mikd abava, There is n0 gmund avaiiable “m #312 pe‘l'H'ianer’ for review/rem}! 0f “ma arder‘ da‘red 15*“ December“, 2008. Tha pa’rifion i3, accar‘dingw, dismissed. Sd/i Dhirendra Mishra Judge