1 S.B. WRIT PETITION NO.1075/2008 State of Rajasthan & Ors. Vs. Smt. Kanta Khandelwal DATE OF ORDER : 3.4.2008 HON'BLE MR JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR Mr. B.L. Bhati, for the petitioners. Mr. N.K. Khandelwal, for the respondent. **** This petition for writ is preferred to challenge the order passed by the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal accepting a review petition preferred by the respondent government servant. The noticeable facts of the case are that the respondent government servant was promoted as Lecturer, School Education on 10.11.1995 in the pay scale of Rs.2000-3500 with a fixation of basic pay at Rs.2450/-. Subsequently it revealed that the fixation of pay was erroneously made at Rs. 2450/- instead of Rs.2300/-. Accordingly, an order was made for rectification of error and also to effect recovery from the government servant (respondent No.1) for the amount said to be paid in excess. The respondent No.1 being aggrieved by the order of recovery preferred an appeal before the Rajasthan Civil Services Appellate Tribunal and that came to be rejected on 17.9.1999. A review petition, thereafter, was filed by the respondent No.1 but that was referred to the third member as the two members of the Tribunal had descenting views. The third member by its order dated 30.11.2005 accepted the review petition and set aside the order of recovery sought to be made from the government servant. The contention advanced to challenge the order passed by the Tribunal is that the Rajasthan Civil Services (Service Matter) Appellate Tribunal Act, 1976, no where empowers the Tribunal to review its 2 orders, therefore, the Tribunal erred while entertaining and accepting the review petition preferred by the respondent No.2. No other argument is advanced. I am having no doubt that the review is a creation of statute and if no review is prescribed under the statute the authority that has passed the judgment earlier is having no jurisdiction to examine the order concerned by reviewing the same. However, in the instant matter I do not consider it appropriate to interfere with the order passed by the Tribunal as the same is just and proper on merits. It is true that erroneous fixation of the pay was made by the respondents but that was not due to any misrepresentation or fraud on the part of respondent government servant. The error in fixation has already been rectified and only direction given by the Tribunal is not to recover the amount said to be paid in excess from the petitioner. Such an order is just and fair. Hence, any interference by this Court under Article 226 and 227 of the Constitution is unwarranted. The petitioner for writ is accordingly dismissed. (GOVIND MATHUR),J. Jgoyal