IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.197 of 2006 SURENDRA YADAV, S/o Sri Ram Swaroop Yadav, R/o Village- Dumri, P.O.-Malikpur, P.S.-Rajgir, District- Nalanda. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. The District Commandant Bihar, Grih Raksha Bahini, Nalanda. 3. The Dy. S.P. (Duty Officer), Home Guard Biharshari. 4. Commandant General, Bihar Grih Raksha Bahini, Patna. For the Petitioner :Mr. Jagnnath Singh, Advocate. For the State :S.C.-I. ----------- 5. 06-08-2010 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned counsel for the State. 2. This petition has been filed for review of order dated 06- 07-2006, by which a Bench of this Court disposed of C.W.J.C. NO. 10155/03 with finding that the State Government has filed counter affidavit in which it was stated that though the petitioner was only a Homeguard and not a permanent employee of the State Government at the time he suffered accident, taking a compassionate view he has been paid Rs. 53,210/- by the Government. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the statement made in the counter affidavit about payment is absolutely false and that the question of absorption of the petitioner as a Government employee due to his permanent disability had not been considered. 4. So far the question of non-payment of the amount claimed by the petitioner is concerned, this is not the matter to be considered in a review petition rather for realization of the said amount step should be taken or petitioner may file a petition for - 2 - initiating a proceeding of contempt against the authority concerned for filing a false affidavit. 5. So far the question of absorption as a Government Employee is concerned, this court could not have granted this relief as the petitioner was not a permanent employee of the State Government and it was for the authorities to consider the same and pass necessary order. Accordingly, petitioner will always be at liberty to file appropriate representation before the authority concerned for the said relief. 6. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this court does not find any error apparent on the face of the record nor does it find any material to take a different view. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. Sujit (S.N.Hussain, J.)