GHANA PEGU Vs. BINOD KUMAR AGARWALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Judgment and order dated 24.09.2013 passed by this Court in WP(C) 3838/2010 has been brought under challenge by two review petitions, namely, Review Petition No. 155/2013 and Review Petition No. 156/2013. The Review Petition No. 155/2013 has been filed by one Ghana Pegu, who was the respondent No. 6 in the main writ petition and the review Petition No. 156/2013 has been filed by one Aswini Kumar Baishya, who was the respondent No. 6 in the main writ petition.

(2.) I have heard Mr. D. Das, learned senior counsel assisted by Mr. M.K. Bora, learned counsel for review petitioner in Review Petition No. 156/2013. Mr. S.S. Dey, learned counsel has appeared on behalf of the review petitioner in Review Petition No. 155/2013. Both these review petitions have been contested by the writ petitioner. I have heard Mr. U.K. Nair on behalf of the writ petitioners. In these writ petitions I have also heard Dr. B. Ahmed, learned Standing Counsel of the Co-operation Department.

(3.) Mr. D. Das, learned senior counsel arguing on behalf of Aswini Kumar Baishyawould argue that the review petition is liable to be allowed on the ground that while passing the order in the main writ petition, promotion order of Aswini Kumar Baishya passed on 07.11.2007 was set aside on 24.09.2013 after expiry of about 6 years relying on judgment of this Court in the case of Khanindra Nath Choudhury v. State of Assam, 2007 4 GauLT 587. Mr. Das submits that even if the law laid down in the aforesaid case is followed even then setting aside of promotion after such inordinate delay is not permissible and even in case of Khanindra Nath Choudhury , the promotion granted to Private Respondent was not set aside even after holding that Private Respondent was erroneously promoted in view of the fact that there cannot be reservation in a cadre consisting of 4 posts.