[1] DB REVIEW PET NO. 195/2008 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT D.B. CIVIL REVIEW PETITION NO. 195/2008 IN D.B. CIVIL SPECIAL APPEAL (WRIT) NO. 8/2006 RAJASTHAN FINANCIAL CORPORATION & ORS. Vs. PREM SINGH RATHORE Date: 02.03.2009 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE K.S. RATHORE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK Mr. Virendra Lodha, Advocate for the appellants. Mr. D.S. Poonia, Advocate for the respondents. **** The main argument of the review-petitioners is that the learned Single Judge placed reliance on the judgment dated 24.05.2002 passed by the Division Bench at the main seat at Jodhpur in D.B. Civil Special Appeal (Writ) No. 156/2002- The Rajasthan Financial Corporation through its Managing Director Vs. Jagdish Kumar Purohit, wherein the Division Bench has granted relief to the respondents to the extent of seniority but has not awarded consequential benefits, whereas the learned Single Judge having placed reliance on the judgment of the Division Bench, has granted consequential benefit also, which is contrary to the judgment passed by the Division Bench. Learned counsel for the review-petitioners further submits that the Division Bench vide judgment dated 04.01.2006 has affirmed the order [2] DB REVIEW PET NO. 195/2008 passed by the learned Single Judge dated 02.12.2005, whereby consequential benefits have also been granted to the respondent/petitioner, without considering the ratio decided by the Division Bench in the case of The Rajasthan Financial Corporation through its Managing Director Vs. Jagdish Kumar Purohit (supra) and the same requires review. We have heard rival submissions of the respective parties and carefully perused the judgment rendered by the learned Single Judge as well as by the Division Bench of this Court. We have also carefully gone through the ratio decided by the Division Bench in the case of The Rajasthan Financial Corporation through its Managing Director Vs. Jagdish Kumar Purohit (supra), dated 24.05.2002. As per the settled preposition of law, it is the total discretion of the Court to grant the consequential benefits or not, and in view of the settled preposition of law, we do not find any illegality or error apparent on the face of the record which requires any interference by this Court in the judgment dated 04.01.2006 passed by the Division Bench. Consequently, the review petition fails being devoid of merit and the same is hereby dismissed. (SATYA PRAKASH PATHAK),J. (K.S. RATHORE),J. /KKC/