1

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CIVIL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CIVIL APPEAL NO.2630 OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP(C) No. 21497 of 2006)

Dharam Deo Narayan Singh                                       ……….Appellant

Versus

The State of Jharkhand  & Anr.                                 ……..Respondents

ORDER  

              Leave granted.

2) The appellant  calls  in  question  the  correctness  or  otherwise  of  the  

judgment  and  order  passed  in  L.P.A.  No.  257  of  2003  dated  

3/10.8.2004 and the order passed in Civil Review No. 100 of 2004  

dated 4/6.12.2005.

3) The appellant aggrieved by the rejection of the claim by the learned  

Single Judge in counting the service rendered by him earlier in the co-

operative institution, had filed Letter Patent Appeal before the High  

Court  of Jharkhand at Ranchi in L.P.A. No. 257 of 2003.  By the  

impugned order dated 3/10.8.2004, the court has rejected the appeal.

2

After such rejection, the appellant had filed Review Petition No. 100  

of 2004.  Alongwith the Petition, the appellant had produced circular  

instruction issued by the Government of  India,  Ministry  of Human  

Resources  Development,  Department  of  Education,  New Delhi  and  

other documents,  which according to him, would support his claim  

made before the authorities and also before the court.  

4) The Review Petition was rejected by the court on the ground that  

there was no error apparent on the face of the record and, therefore,  

review of the order  passed in L.P.A.  No.  257 of  2003 was not  

called for.  

5) The grievance of the appellant and his counsel before us, is that; if  

the documents produced by the appellant had been considered by  

the  court,  it  would have certainly helped the appellant  to  claim  

higher pensionary benefits.  

6) The  learned  counsel  for  the  respondents  justifies  the  impugned  

order.

7) Having considered the rival claims of the parties, in our view, in  

order to do complete justice, we deem it proper to set aside the  

order passed by the High Court in Civil Review Petition without  

going into niceties of order 47 Rule 1 of Code of Civil Procedure.

3

8) Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by the High Court in  

Civil  Review  Petition  No.  100  of  2004  dated  4/6.12.2005  and  

direct the High Court to reconsider the Review Petition filed by the  

appellant by taking on record the circulars and other documents  

filed along with the Review Petition as  expeditiously as possible  

within an outer limit of six months. We hasten to add, we have not  

expressed anything on the merits of the claim of the appellant.  The  

appeal is disposed of accordingly. No order as to costs.  

                                                                                     …………………………………J.                                                                                        [ TARUN CHATTERJEE ]

                                                                                     …………………………………J.                                                                                        [ H.L. DATTU ]

New Delhi, April 17, 2009.