- (1.) These are two applications filed by Narendra Kumar and others, respondents in the writ petition.
(2.) By Application No. 30451 of 2005, review of the judgment ot this Court dated 11 -8-2004 has been sought and by Application No. 29291 of 2004, six months time has been prayed for vacating the properties in question.
(3.) On the close of arguments, learned counsel who argued the matter from both sides, submitted that they may give brief note which may facilitate this Court in passing the order and thus, brief note/submission given has not been made part of record and that has been just perused. A brief note given by Sri Singh, learned counsel in support of review petition is clearly reiteration of various facts and details in the light of evidence which is the part of counter-affidavit filed in the writ petitions and thus they are reiteration of the facts and details on which re-appraisal and re-hearing appears to be an effort which for the reasons indicated in this order and within limited scope of consideration may not be permissible.;