HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR Revizw Pe+i+ion No.33 of 2009 APPELLANTS 1. STa‘re of Chhm‘fisgar‘h, Through Secrefar‘y, Education Depar’rmenT, D.K.$. Bhawan, Dis’rricT—Raipur‘ (6.6.) 2. DisTric? Educafion Officer, Balaudabazar‘, Dis’rricf - Raipur (CG) 3.Block Educafion Officer, Bhu’rapam, Dis’r. Raipur Champa (CG) 4.TreasUry, Accoun’r & Pension, Disf. Raipur‘ (C.G.) Vs RESPONDENT SmT. Ujwaia Das, Aged ubou? ~ 58 years, W/o Shri A.K. Das, Pancham Diwan Girls H.S. Schooi, Bha’rapara, Dis’rricf— Raipur‘ (CG). ORDER (In chamber) (Passed on Jib. 2009) Dhirendra Mishra, J”: 1. The appellanf—S‘rm‘e and ifs officers have filed This applicaTion and prayed for review of The order dafed 6.2.2009 passed by This Cour? in W.P. (s) No.83/09. AppellanTs have also preferred an applicaTion for condonafion of delay as fhe review pefifion has been preferred wifh a delay of 31 days. . For The reasons indicated in ’rhe applicm‘ion dafed 08.04.2009 for condonafion of delay, which is also supporfed by The affidaviT of Shri B.L. Kurre, D.E.O., Bilaspur, The applicaTion for condonaTion of delay is allowed and delay is condoned. . IT is seTTled law fhaT The High CourT exercises power of review as a CourT of plenary jurisdicTion To prevenT miscarriage of jusTice or To correcT grave and palpable errors commiTTed by iT. There are no definiTive limiTs To The exercise of The powers of review. The power of review may be exercised on The discovery of new and imporTanf ma‘H’er or evidence which, afTer The exercise of due diligence, was nof wifhin The knowledge of The person seeking The review or could noT be produced by him af The fime when The order was made. IT may be record is found. However, The power is To be exercised wifhin The Iimifah’ons as provided under SecTion 114 read wh‘h Order 47 of fhe Code of Civil Procedure, 1908. . From perusal of The order under review and original record of W.P. (s) No.83/O9, if is evident ThuT afTer hearing counsel for fhe pe'l’ifioner as we“ as The respondenTs/S’rafe in defail The wrh‘ pefifion was allowed, subjecf To all verificafions regarding The fac‘rs pleaded in fhe pe’rifion. Various circulars 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. W“ " . ndxa Mi Dhxte wdge exercised where some mis’rake or error opporen‘r on The face of The (RA Rcshan/— shia