Purpose of Review Provision Is Not To Scrutinise The Correctness Of Decision: Supreme Court

WHAT DID THE Court SAY?

• In Pancham Lal Pandey vs Neeraj Kumar Mishra, the Supreme Court reiterated that the provision related to review is not there to go over and determine the correctness of a decision. 
• A Division Bench of Justice V. Ramasubramanian and Justice Pankaj Mithal observed that the purpose of a review is to correct any error which is visible on the face of the order without going into the possibility of determining a different opinion from the one expressed.

WHAT IS THE CASE ABOUT?

• In this case, a writ petition was filed in the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad relating to the payment of salary to the teachers. 
• The High Court took a review of the prior order and reversed the decision on completely different grounds. 
• This act of the High Court was opposed by the appellants and consequently an appeal was filed challenging the same.

CONTENTIONS OF THE PARTIES: 

• The Counsel for the appellant contended that the Review Application was not maintainable in this case as there was no error visible on the face of the record. Further, a review cannot be used to completely change the previous order.
• The Counsel for the respondents contended that the review petition was maintainable and there was an error apparent in the order of the Division Bench.

OBSERVATION OF THE COURT AND DECISION:

• The Ld. Court noted that the provision relating to review is to correct an error apparent on the face of the order and not to scrutinise the correctness of it.
• The Court observed that while dealing with a review, judges must refrain from dwelling on the possibility of another opinion different from the one expressed prior to it.
• Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the decision of the Allahabad High Court was set aside.

What do you think about the decision of the Court? Let us know in the comments section below!