JAWAID RAHMANI Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE respondent no.2 Shri Hamidullah Bhat and the respondent no.3 National Council for Promotion of Urdu Language (NCPUL) both seek review of the judgment dated 9th December, 2011 disposing of the writ petition, in so far as holding the respondent no.2 Shri Hamidullah Bhat entitled to continue as the Director of the respondent no.3 NCPUL till attaining the age of 58 years only and being not entitled to any extension thereafter, even if available to the government servants.

(2.) WE have in the judgment dated 9th December, 2011 itself noticed that though not subject matter of pleadings but the arguments in the writ petition had veered around to, whether the respondent no.2 is entitled to continue till the age of 58 years or till the increased age of superannuation of 60 years. The respondents, though not disputing the said position, have sought review contending that owing to the aforesaid aspect being not dealt with in pleadings, certain documents remained to be cited. Reliance in this regard is placed on:-

(3.) THE counsel for the petitioner/non review applicant is correct in contending that all the aforesaid aspects already stand considered and dealt within the judgment dated 9th December, 2011. THE minutes of the meeting of the Executive Board now shown do not persuade us to form an opinion that there is any error apparent in the judgment requiring review.