Sudhir Agarwal, J. - (1.) This review application has been filed on behalf of Respondent No. 3 seeking review of my judgment dated 31.08.2009, whereby the petition was allowed and promotion of the Respondent No. 3 on the post of Sadar Munsarim and Senior Administrative Officer was quashed.
(2.) Shri Nirvikar Gupta, learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 3 stated that he could not put in appearance when the matter was heard by this Court since the case was transferred from Court No. 32 to court No. 24 and he could not get this information hence could not appear on 31.08.2009 as a result whereof the judgment has been passed without hearing him. In the circumstances I gave him full opportunity of hearing to point out the error in my judgment.
(3.) Learned Counsel for the Respondent No. 3 contended that he was never promoted as Stenographer. He was initially appointed as Clerk and thereafter was deputed as Stenographer whereagainst he objected too and the said deputment was revoked. Thereafter by a committee report, annexure CA -2 to the counter affidavit, he was promoted as Sadar Munsarim from Clerical Cadre and not from the post of Stenographer. He submits that the judgment of this Court is contrary to the facts as this fact has not been noticed by this Court.;