E!iEI -# .,'`,/ # lN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKiM OF}DEF` SHEET Review Petition State o£ Sikkim 6[ Others Versus IJ.P.Pand No.1 of 2oo4 Petitioner / Appellant Pespondent \\ \,- Order with Signature Office Note as to action (if any) taken on Order I. 9.8.2004 Heard Shri S. P. Wangdi, learned Advocate General for the petitionerras well as Shri A. Moulik, learned Counsel for the respondents. The Registry points out that there is delay in filing review. The judgment under review was delivered on 16.12.2003 and the review petition was to be filed within 30 days i.e. on 15.1.2004, which fell during the winter vacation. The Court reopened on 23.2.2004 after the vacation on which day the review petition was filed. In the circumstances, there was no delay in filing the review petition. The objection raised dy the Registry is overruled. W: have duly corisidered the submissions made by tl=e learned Advocate General appeal.ing for the petitioners. We do not find any valid and cogent reason to review our judgment. We however make it clear that the direction of the Court contained in the judgment shall be confined only to the writ petitioners and the private respondents of the writ petition. It is further made clear that it is under the wisdom and domain of the competent authority i.e. the State Government, to take final decision in the matter keeping in view of the observations and the ' directions of this Court made in the related judgment under review. •`t`