:‘.IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BILASPUR [C.G.) £[o M.C.C. NO ....... [2005 APPLICANT Sudiep Shrivastava Versus r3» 3&2 / 20p4 _L. , 'f W £@ yd? Fce4 55/2 r 85 others. NON-APPLICANT State of Chhattisgarh v“ APPLICATION OF REVIEW OF THE ORDER MADE IN W.P. NO. _ Xl-HC-78 lmwimWCZW/w mm mam (W) ammefm“ mamw‘ 5 V ’ mmmsnéa mmifwm $Wméa , FULL BENCH , HON’BLE SHRI A.K. PATNAIK, HON’BLE SHRI FAKHRUDDIN, HON’BLE SHRI LC. BHA 29-09-2005 M.C.c. No. 210 of 2005. , learned counsel for the Petitioner, Mr. Prashant Mishra, learned Addl Advocate Gerieral with Mr. Sandeep Dubey', Govt. Advocate fof the mte of Chhattisgarh and Mr. Manindra Shrivastava, learned Sr. Advoca e with Mr. Amrito Das. learned counsel for the Guru Ghasidas Univesity CIMS. Heard Mr. Prateek Shar This is an application filed by one Sudiep Shrivaslava for review of our Judgment and order dated 2 09.2005 in W.P. No.3642 of 2004. d counsel for the petitioner submitted- that in our said‘Judgment and der we have made it clear that those amongst the students who were entitled to admission to the 41 seats on the basis of their merit in the Mr. Prateek Sharma, lea rit list but have been admitted to the payment seats in ‘the acade ic session ‘will be liable to pay only Rs.34,500/— per annum and the r maining students will continue to pay the fees of Rs.2,50,000/- because ey were not entitled to admission to the 41 seats as per'their merit and had agreed to pay Rs.2,50,000/— at the time of admission. He submitte that the reservation policy, as discussed in the rules for admission'to th MBBS Course in CIMS will have to be applied for the purpose of etermination as to who amongst the oandidates would be entitled to admission in the 41 so called payment seats and for this purpose this r view application is filed. , \ . & DO m e r e \ L;;;J,.A,.,_; ' < V " @. g Xl-HC~78 m asniq; m C‘C‘ 1’ 0/ 05 in zoo mam (W3) anémaiéwim ' mmmmsr' _ / x WW#%W 2 asWanésl We are afraid, this review application is misconceived. By the said Judgment and order dated 23. .2005 in W.P. No.3642 of 2004 we have bn/ " only decided the issue as to wh er the CIMS would,entitied to collect the fees higher than Rs.34,500l- fr m the candidates admitted‘to so called payment seats and'we have he that the CIMS-would not be entitled to. collect higher fees of Rs.2,50,0 OI- for the academic session 2004—2005 and Rs.1 ,90,0001- for the a ademic session 2005-2006 from 41 candidates who were entitled t admission on the basis of their merit in the so called payment seats an they can collect only Rs.34,500/- from them as they have collected in he case of the students admitted to the free seats. In para 27 of the Judgm ht and order while disposing of the W.P. No.3642 of 2004 we have furth r directed that the writ petitions be listed before the learned Single Judg who will consider the facts of each case in the light of the principles an observations laid down in the Judgment after hearing the learned couns for the parties and pass final orders after taking into consideration the in erim orders, if any, passed in the case. Hence, the applicant may ‘move he learned Single Judge for relief. The M.C.C. stands dispo ed of accordingly. - Li‘s Sd/— Chief Justice , Sd/— L.C.BHADOO Judge £4bk VI e h