High CourtsDivision Bench(2022) 10 DEL CK 0180

Ravinder Yadav vs Puneet Kumar Goel & Anr

Delhi High Court · Decided on 27 October 2022

HON’BLE JUDGES
Suresh Kumar Kait, J · Saurabh Banerjee, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
CONT.APP.(C) No. 12 Of 2022

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

14 paragraphs · 322 words

CM APPLs. 41859-41860/2022(for exemption)

1.

Allowed, subject to all just exceptions.

2.

Applications are accordingly disposed of.

CM APPL. 41861/2022 (for condonation of 28 days delay in filing review petition)

3.

In view of the reasons stated in the present application, the delay of 28 days in filing the Review Petition is condoned. The Review Petition is taken for hearing today itself.

4.

Accordingly, the present application is allowed and disposed of.

REVIEW PET. 239/2022

5.

By way of the present review petition, the appellant is seeking to review the order dated 18.05.2022 passed in CONT. APP(C)12/2022 by  deciding the CRLM-7164/2021 filed in CONT. CAS(C)-426/2018.

6.

Vide order dated 18.05.2022, while disposing of the contempt appeal, this Court observed as under:-

“7. In view of above, learned Single Judge observed that since the contempt petition was filed prior to the modification of the order dated 01.11.2017, nothing survived in the matter and hence, the contempt petition was disposed of.

8.

Learned Single Judge has also observed that in case the petitioner has further grievance regarding the non-compliance of the order dated 22.09.2021, it is always open to the petitioner to take all such remedies as may be available to him in accordance with law.

9.

On perusal of the impugned order dated 27.04.2022 and the observation made by learned Single Judge after submission of the roster of sanitation workers, we find no illegality and perversity in the impugned order.”

7.

In view of above, by virtue of this petition the appellant once again seeks re-appreciation of facts, which is not permissible in review. The appellant has failed to show any mistake or error apparent on the face of record. Under the garb of the present petition, the appellant is seeking re-adjudication of the already settled issues which is nor permissible in law and/or facts.

8.

Accordingly, we find no ground to recall the order dated 18.05.2022. The review petition is accordingly dismissed.