Mr. Harbinder Singh Kalsi and Anr v. The State of Assam and 25 Ors

ORDER 30-05-2023 Heard Shri N. Das, learned counsel for the applicant, who by means of this application has prayed for review of the order dated 23.03.2023 passed in WP(C) No. 5139/2016.

¶2By the said order, while the writ petition has been dismissed, the matter was referred to the Bar Council for appropriate steps against the counsel on record involved and cost was also imposed. This review has been filed by one of the counsel, who was representing the so-called petitioner.

¶3Before passing of the aforesaid order dated 23.03.2023 this Court had heard the parties at length and took into account the various reports placed on record including the reports of the investigation agency that no person in the name of the writ petitioner was existing. A number of opportunities was given to the present applicant, who was the counsel, to have the petitioner appear in person before this Court which was initially readily agreed to be done. However, in the subsequent dates, the stand of Page No.# 6/8 the counsel had changed by submitting that the writ petitioner could not be contacted. This Court had recorded in details regarding the steps taken by the Counsel on behalf of the so-called writ petitioner in filing applications under the Right to Information Act and the writ proceedings had also continued for about 6 years. Under those circumstances and taking into account the entire matter, the order was passed.

¶4Shri Das, the learned counsel has submitted that after passing of the order, the applicant could come to know about a caveat which was lodged in the Trial Court against the writ petitioner and from that he has submitted that inference can be drawn that the writ petitioner was existing.

¶5The aforesaid submission is not relevant as the same relates to a caveat in the Trial Court from which only an inference has been sought be drawn. In any case, the role of a Review Court is a limited one wherein powers of review can be exercised only under extra-ordinary circumstances which do not appear to be existing in the instant case.

¶6The learned counsel Shri Das has placed reliance upon the case of S. Madhusudhan Reddy Vs V. Narayana Reddy & ors. reported in 2022 SCC Online 1034.

¶7The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the said case had endorsed the earlier view of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kamlesh Verma Vs. Mayawati & Ors. reported in (2013) 8 SCC 320;wherein the following principles have been laid down:- "20. Thus, in view of the above, the following grounds of review are maintainable as stipulated by the statute:

20.1. When the review will be maintainable:

(i) Discovery of new and important matter or evidence which, after the exercise of due diligence, was not within knowledge of the petitioner or could not be Page No.# 7/8 produced by him;

(ii) Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record;

(iii) Any other sufficient reason.

The words "any other sufficient reason" have been interpreted in Chhajju Ram v. Neki and approved by this Court in Moran Mar Basselios Catholicos v. Most Rev. Mar Poulose Athanasius to mean "a reason sufficient on grounds at least analogous to those specified in the rule". The same principles have been reiterated in Union of India v. Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd.

20.2. When the review will not be maintainable:

(i) A repetition of old and overruled argument is not enough to reopen concluded adjudications.

(ii) Minor mistakes of inconsequential import.

(iii) Review proceedings cannot be equated with the original hearing of the case.

(iv) Review is not maintainable unless the material error, manifest on the face of the order, undermines its soundness or results in miscarriage of justice.

(v) A review is by no means an appeal in disguise whereby an erroneous decision is reheard and corrected but lies only for patent error.

(vi) The mere possibility of two views on the subject cannot be a ground for review.

(vii) The error apparent on the face of the record should not be an error which has to be fished out and searched.

(viii) The appreciation of evidence on record is fully within the domain of the appellate court, it cannot be permitted to be advanced in the review petition. Page No.# 8/8

(ix) Review is not maintainable when the same relief sought at the time of arguing the main matter had been negatived."

¶8In the opinion of this Court, the aforesaid decision, rather than coming to the aid of the applicant would be against the applicant as the limited role of a Review Court has been once again emphasized by the Hon'ble Supreme Court.

¶9Under the aforesaid facts and circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that no case for review has been made out and accordingly the same is dismissed.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant

PageoNo.#o1/8 GAHC010089232023 ooooooo ooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooTHEoGAUHATIoHIGHoCOURTo (HIGHoCOURToOFoASSAM,oNAGALAND,oMIZORAMoANDoARUNACHALoPRADESH)o CaseoNo.o:oReview.Pet./63/2023o MR.oHARBINDERoSINGHoKALSIoANDoANRo S/OoLATEoKEWALoSINGHoKALSI,o RESIDENToOFo18oEASToLANE,oSUNDARPUR,oDISPUR,oGUWAHATIo781005,o ASSAM 2:oMR.oR.SoSADIAL oD/OoMAHIBURoRAHMANoSADIALo RESIDENToOFoOLDoLAKHIPURoROAD MADHURBAND oSILCHAR o788001 oASSAo VERSUSo THEoSTATEoOFoASSAMoANDo25oORS.o REP.oBYoTHEoCHIEFoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM,oDISPUR,o GUWAHATIo-781006. 2:THEoCOMMISSIONERoANDoSECRETARYoTOoTHEoGOVT.oOFoASSAM oHOMEoDEPARTMENT oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-o781006. 3:THEoCOMMISSIONERoOFoPOLICE oKAMRUPoMETROPOLITANoDISTRICT oPANBAZAR oGUWAHATIo-o781001. 4:THEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oDISPURoPOLICEoSTATION oDISPUR oGUWAHATIo-o781006. PageoNo.#o2/8 5:THEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oHATIGAONoPOLICEoSTATION oHATIGAON oGUWAHATI-o781038. 6:SHRIoBIRENoBORA oSUB-oINSPECTORoOFoPOLICE oCHANDMARIoPOLICEoSTATION oCHANDMARIoGUWAHATI-781003. 7:JAVEDoALIo@oSAURAVoNATH o9707430687oS/OoMD.oMUKHTARoALIoR/OoHOUSEoNO.o23 oRAJPATHoROAD oOPPOSITEoNAAMoGHAR oDISPUR oTOoHATIGAONoROAD oGUWAHATIo-o781038 oP.S.oHATIGAONoTHROUGHoTHEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oHATIGAONoPOLICEoSTATION 8:SMTI.oNILPAMAoNIJARAoBORA o9707430687oW/OoJAVEDoALIo@oSAURAVoNATHoR/OoHOUSEoNO.o23 oRAJPATHoROAD oOPPOSITE oNAAMoGHAR oDISPURoTOoHATIGAONoROAD oGUWAHATIo-781038 oP.S.oHATIGAONoTHROUGHoTHEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oHATIGAONoPOLICEoSTATION. 9:MD.oMUKHTARoALI oF/OoJAVEDoALIo@oSAURAVoNATHo9707430687oR/OoHOUSEoNO.o23 oRAJPATHoROAD oOPPOSITEoNAAMoGHAR oDISURoTOoHATIGAONoROAD oGUWAHATIo-o781038 oP.S.oHATIGAONoTHROUGHoTHEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oHATIGAONoPOLICEoSTATIONo 10:SHRIoRAMoAVTARoAGARWALLAoBURAKIA o9435071111oS/OoLT.oPRAKASHoCHANDRAoAGARWALLAoR/OoHOUSEoNO.o19 oARUNDODAYAoPATH oPRAKASHoKUNJ oNARAYANoNAGAR oKUMARPARA oP.S.oBHARALUMUKH oGUWAHATIo-o781009. Page No.# 3/8 11:SHRI SANJAY KUMAR MOJIKA R/O HOUSE NO. 2 BYE LANE NO. 2 NEAR BANK OF INDIA A.K. AZAD ROAD REHABARI GUWAHATI - 781008. 12:SHRI GOVIND SHARMA FATHER OF SHRI RUPAM SHARMA C/O C.K. SARMA BUILDER HOUSE NO. JANPATH ROAD OPPOSITE NAMGHAR GUWAHATI- 781006 P.S. HATIGAON 13:SMTI. POONAM YADAV ADVOCATE W/O SHRI RAM AVATAR AGARWALLA BURAKIA R/O 19 ARUNDODAYA PATH PRAKASH KUNJ NARAYAN NAGAR KUMARPARA P.S. BHARALUMUKH GUWAHATI - 781009. 14:respondent DELETED Court Order Dtd. 17/11/17 passed in I. A. C 3733/17 15:SHRI PHON SYIH R/O VILL- THANGSAKAR P.O. LUMSHONG P.S. KHLIERIANT JAINTIA HILLS MEGHALAYA PIN - 793200. 16:SHRI MUKESH AGARWALLA C/O SHRI RAM AVATAR AGARWALLA BURAKIA R/O 19 ARUNDODAYA PATH PRAKASH KUNJ NARAYAN NAGAR KUMARPARA P.S. BHARALUMUKH GUWAHATI - 781009 17:respondent DELETED Court Order Dtd. 17/11/17 passed in WP C 5139/2016 PageoNo.#o4/8 18:SHRIoN.A.K.oSYIEM oMCS oPERSONNELoandoA.R.oAoDEPARTMENT oMEGHALAYA oSHILLONG-1. 19:SHRIoSANTOSHoSINGH oMANoSINGHoDRIVERoC/OoSHYAMoBIHARIoSINGHoTAXIoOWNER/DRIVERo A.S.T.C.oTAXIoPARKINGoSTAND oPALTANBAZAR oGUWAHATIo-o781008oTHROUGHoTHEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oPALTANoBAZARoPOLICEoSTATION 20:SHRIoROCKYBULoHUSSAIN oMLA oMLAoHOSTEL oDISPUR oGUWAHATIo-o781006. 21:SHRIoUMESHoMANDAL oDRIVERo8135085694oC/OoANUPoMISHRA oTAXIoOWNERoA.S.T.C.oTAXIoPARKINGoSTAND oPALTANoBAZAR oGUWAHATI-o781008 oTHROUGHoTHEoOFFICER-IN-CHARGE oPALTANoBAZARoPOLICEoSTATION 22:THEoBRANCHoMANAGER oSTATEoBANKoOFoINDIA oDISPURoBRANCH oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-o781006. 23:THEoPOSToMASTERoGENERAL oMEGHDOOToBHAWAN oPANBAZAR oGUWAHATIo-781001. 24:DOWNoTOWNoHOSPITAL oREP.oBYoITSoSUPERINTENDENT oDISPUR oGUWAHATI-o781006. 25:GUWAHATIoMEDICALoCOLLEGEoANDoHOSPITAL Page No.# 5/8 REP. BY ITS SUPERINTENDENT BHANGAGARH GUWAHATI - 781032. 26:SHRI PABAN RAI MECHANIC 9085293805 C/O TRIBUBHAN SINGH TAXI OWNER A.S.T.C. TAXI PARKING STAND PALTAN BAZAR GUWAHATI - 781008 THROUGH THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE PALTAN BAZAR POLICE STATIO Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. I SINGH Advocate for the Respondent : GA, ASSAM BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR MEDHI