Dinesh Kumar Sharma vs Secretary

V. Ajay Kumar, J

The applicants filed the instant R.A. No. 7/2019 seeking review of order dated 12.11.2018 in R.A. No. 200/2017 in O.A. No. 1072/2017.

The O.A. No. 1072/2017 was originally disposed of vide order dated 30.03.2017.

The original applicants in the said O.A., filed the R.A. No. 200/2017 for review of the said order, which was allowed on 12.11.2018. After the R.A. No. 200/2017 was allowed, the O.A. No. 1072/2017 was restored and the same was again disposed of vide order dated 15.11.2018.

The instant R.A. No. 7/2019 seeking review of order in earlier review i.e. R.A. No. 200/2017 was filed on 11.12.2018, that is subsequent to the second disposal of the O.A. No. 1072/2017.

The instant review filed seeking review of the earlier review after the disposal of the OA second time, has become infructuous and accordingly not maintainable.

Even otherwise, the O.A. No. 1072/2017 vide latest order dated 15.11.2018 was disposed of as under:-

With the consent of both sides, the O.A is taken up for hearing. Since identical O.As were allowed by a co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal, this O.A is also disposed of in terms of the order of this Tribunal in O.As No. 2906/2016 and 1080/2017 dated 06.07.2017, in Nirmala Gupta & Others Vs. Union of India and Ors. and Sh. Pratichhan Kumar & Ors. Vs. Union of India & Ors. However, the same is subject to the result of the Writ Petitions No. 5653/2017 and 5654/2017 pending before the Hon'ble High Court, against the orders in the said O.As.

The perusal of the above order indicates that the O.A. was disposed of, subject to the result of the pending WPs filed by the respondents, before the Hon'ble High Court. Hence the review application filed after the second O.A was disposed of, would not cause any prejudice to the review applicants, since the O.A. was disposed of, subject to the result of the WPs filed by the respondents themselves.

Accordingly, the instant R.A. is disposed of.