SIPRA KANJI Vs. KOLKATA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) An application for review of the judgement and order dtd. 12/1/2010 delivered in MAT No. 1118 of 2009 has been filed on the grounds, interalia:-

(2.) Learned Counsel, Mr. Achintya Kumar Banerjee, appearing on behalf of the applicant has time and again submitted that the petitioner has been fighting for cause of justice since 1997 and in spite of presence of glaring illegalities and irregularities at the instance of the respondent no. 1 and its officers, the applicant was unable to get justice from the court of law as the concerned authorities suppressed material facts, documents and other papers with the sole motive to deprive the applicant from being appointed in the post of Junior Assistant in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation. Learned counsel has also drawn the attention of this court to several documents, which according to him, were obtained by the applicant after delivery of the judgment and order dtd. 12/1/2010. From a cursory glance over the said documents, it will be found that relevant norms for recruiting staff in the OBC category or reserved category were not followed by the concerned officers of the respondent no. 1 at the relevant time and as a result of which the petitioner was deprived from getting the relevant job in the Kolkata Municipal Corporation.

(3.) Learned counsel of the appellant has argued that if serious injustice is caused due to the relevant judgment and order for non-availability of material documents, the court in a review application can remove such injustice caused by its earlier order. In support of his contention, learned counsel has submitted case laws reported in (2008) 8 SCC 612 SCC OnLine Web Edition, RLW 1950 Federal Court page no. 158 and also one reportable judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No. 593 and 594 of 2022, M/s. Granuels Limited Vs. Union of India, delivered on January 23, 2022. Learned counsel has further submitted that in view of the fact that serious injustice has been caused to the applicant due to the fault of the concerned officers of the respondent no. 1, some notional appointment may be given to the unfortunate applicant and necessary monetary benefits may be extended to her.