IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA C. REV. No.306 of 2008 DEO NARAYAN BARAI son of Late Chaman Barai, resident of village Garilong, P.S. and P.O. Tandwa, District Chatra (Jharkhand)… …Petitioner..Appellant…Petitioner Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR, 2. The Commissioner-cum-Secretary, Food and Consumer Protection Department, Government of Bihar, Old Secretariat, Patna, 3. The National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission through its President, 5th Floor „A‟ Wng, Janpath Bhawan, Janpath, New Delhi-110 001, 4. The State Commission, Consumer Protection, through its President, 3rd Floor, Biscomaun Tower, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800 001, 5. The Secretary/Registrar, State Commission, Consumer Protection, 3rd Floor, Biscomaun Tower, Gandhi Maidan, Patna-800 001.. … ... ...Respondents…Respondents…Opposite Parties. ----------- 5 06.01.2010 I.A. No. 8216 of 2009: This is an application for condonation of delay of 167 days in preferring the instant review application. We have heard Mr. K.D. Chatterji, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for the State. Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we are inclined to condone the delay in preferring the application for review. It is, accordingly, so ordered. I.A. No. 8216 of 2009 stands disposed of. As we have condoned the delay in preferring the review application, we are inclined to take up this review 2 application for admission. Admit. On consent of the learned counsel for the parties, it is finally heard. In support of the application, it is submitted by Mr. K.D. Chatterji, learned counsel for the petitioner, that an erroneous statement was made by learned counsel for the appellant in Letters Patent Appeal and on that basis order dated 15.05.2008 came to be passed. To appreciate the aforesaid submission of learned counsel for the petitioner, we think it appropriate to quote the following paragraphs of order dated 15.05.2008 passed in L.P.A. No. 31 of 2008:- “Mr. K.D. Chatterji, the counsel for the appellant submits that the appellant is not desirous of claiming arrears of salary for the period from March, 2007 to November, 2007. If that be so, we are satisfied that there is no justification in continuing with the enquiry that has been initiated against the writ petitioner pursuant to the order of the Single Judge. We accordingly dispose of this appeal by the following orders:- 1. We record and accept the statement of the counsel for the appellant that the appellant shall not claim arrears of salary from March, 3 2007 to November, 2007. 2. The enquiry initiated against the appellant under Rule 3 (5) of the Bihar Consumer Protection Rules, 1987 is quashed and set aside.” In our considered opinion, when the statement had already been made by learned counsel for the appellant, and on the basis of which the aforesaid order had been passed by this Court, the same does not warrant any review. Accordingly, the review application is dismissed. (Dipak Misra, CJ) SC ( Dr. Ravi Ranjan, J.)