- (1.) Heard Shri Rajiv Sharma, learned Counsel for the Petitioner-applicants.
(2.) This is an application filed by the applicants seeking review of the judgment dated 03.09.2009 dismissing the writ petition challenging the orders passed by consolidation authorities in chak allotment proceedings. Shri Rajiv Sharma was neither counsel for the Petitioners in the writ petition nor had argued the petition and this fact is admitted to him.
(3.) The question of propriety of filing a review petition and argument by a new counsel, who did not appear in the earlier proceedings, has been considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Tamil Nadu Electricity Board v. N. Raju Reddiar, 1997 AIR(SC) 1005, wherein it was observed as under: The record of the appeal indicates that Shri Sudarsh Menon was the advocate on record when the appeal was heard and decided on merits. The review petition has been filed by Sri Prabir Choudhary who was neither an arguing counsel when the appeal was heard nor he was present at the time of argument. It is unknown on what basis he has written the grounds in the review petition, as if, it is a rehearing of an appeal against our order. He did not confine to the scope of review it would not be in the interest or profession to permit such practice.;