pi3- IN THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR REVIEW PETITION N0. 5 OF 2010 "Sfe B©n APPLICANT RESPONDENT 'TtT"^' -:^^s^.\^ 1. Patil Pawan Nande, S/o Late Shri Nand Kishore Nande, aged about 57 years, Deputy Director of Fisheries, Bilaspur, R/o Qtr. No. G -313, Vikas Nagar, 24 Kholi Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) VERSUS NON-APPLICANT PETITIONER 1. State of Chhattisgarh, through the Principal Secretary, Fisheries Depari:ment, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur(C.G.) 2. Principal Secretary, Fisheries Department, Mantralaya, D.K.S. Bhawan, Raipur (C.G.) 'y.,-y ^y REVIEW PETITIONUNDER RULE 90 READWITH RULE 870F THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH RULES, 2007 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2010 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P. N0. 4065/2003 • 4-... y. HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH : B1LASPUR REVIEW PETITION N0. 52 OF 2010 APPLICANT PETITIONER NON-APPLICANTS Patil Pawan Nande Versus State of Chhattisgarh & Another RESPONDENTS REVIEW PETITOIN UNDER RULE 90 READ WITH RULE 87 OF THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH RULES, 2007 AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 16.03.2010 PASSED BY THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P.NO.4065/2003. Single Bench : Hon'ble Shri Satish K. Agnihotri, J. Present:- Shri Harsh Wardhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Shri M.P.S.Bhatia, Dy. Govt. Advocate for the State, ORDER (Passedon21stdayofJuly, 2010) 1. The petitioner seeks review of the order dated 16/3/2010 passed in W.P. No.4065/03 on the ground that before imposing order of withholding two increments without cumulative effect, no opportunity was afforded to the petitioner. The appellate order was also passed - in complete contravention of the provisiohs of Civil Services (Classification, Control & Appeal) Rules, 1966, without considering grounds and objection raised by the petitioner in its memo of appeal. The imposition of withholding of two increments without cumulative ••. effect is a blot in the career of the petitioner. 2. The judgment and order dated 16/3/2010 passed in W.P.No.4065/03, which is sought to be reviewed, has considered all the points raised in the writ petition and reiterated in this review petition. The imposition of withholding two increments without cumulative effect was upheld. 3. The petitioner by this petition seeks to re-argue the matter afresh as no error apparent on the record or otherwise has been pointed out in the review application. Thus, there-is no reason to review the order ^F^ ^l-T-'o Si> /-^^, dated 16/3/2010, which have been passed after considering all the facts and hearing all the parties. 4. There is no other ground pointed out by the petitioner showing any manifest error on the record and has not further brought into the notice, any new facts which could not be produced earlier despite diligent efforts made by the petitioner. It is well settled principles of law that the review proceedings are not by way of an appeal and have to be strictly confined to the scope and ambit of Order 47 Rule 1 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Even in exercise of review jurisdictjon by the High Court under Article 226 of the Constitution, the applicants havenot produced any ground for review. 5. It appears that the petitioner by presentation of this review petition seeks an opportunity to argue the entire case afresh on merits under the garb of the review petition, which is not permissible and tenable in law. It is well settled principle of law that under the garb of review petition, the applicant should not be permitted to argue the entire case afresh which would amount to convert the review petition into an appeal and the same is not sustainable in law. (See :Meera Bhanjan v.Smt. Nirmal Kumar Chowdhary , Lily Thomas etc. v. Union of Indla and others , Ajit Kumar Rath v. State of Orissa and others, Government of T.N. & Others v. M. Ananchu Asari and others , and Kerla State Electricity Board v. Hitech Electrothermicsm & Hydropower Ltd. and others .) 6. In view ofthe foregoing, the review petition is dismissed. Sd/- Satish K. Ag Judge 'AIR 1995 SC 455 2AIR2000SC 1650 J AIR.2QDO SC 85 "(2005) 2 SCC 332 5 (2005) 6 SCC 651 f^.w.^^-.-VKSSrffwsvVaat^z^f