- (1.) Heard Mr. H.G.S. Parihar, learned Senior Advocate for the review petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the State and perused the material available on record.
(2.) The instant review petition has been filed under Chapter V, Rule 12 of the Rules of the Court read with Section 114 and Order 47 of the C.P.C. by the review petitioner against the judgment and order dated 27.2.2012 passed by this Court in Writ Petition No. 6565 (SS) of 2008 whereby the said writ petition was dismissed.
(3.) Submission of learned counsel for the review petitioner was that wrong facts were placed before the Court on behalf of the respondents and relying upon the pronouncement of this Court in the case of Riyasat Alia and others Vs. State of U.P. and others, 2003 53 AIR 257, which has been followed in the case of Suraj Prasad Tewari Vs. Zila Commandant, Home Guards, Hamirpur and others, 2005 1 UPLBEC 404, the said petition was dismissed. It is further submitted that the said case laws were with reference to the Home Guards, who were not treated to be civil servants as they were on daily payment basis. He has further submitted that review petitioner Sarojani Devi was not a Home Guard but she was Block Organizer in Home Guard Department and subsequently she was promoted under U.P. Home Guard Subordinate Service Rules, 1982 in regular pay scale and confirmed under U.P. Government Service Confirmation Rules, 1991 in Block Organizer Cadre, as such, she was a civil servant and the rejection of her earlier petition holding her to be an ordinary Home Guard not falling without the purview of Civil Servant was an error apparent on the face of record.;