S.U.KHAN, J. - (1.) HEARD learned counsel for both the parties on several dates.
(2.) THIS writ petition after hearing both the parties was allowed on 6.12.2006. Thereafter this review petition has been filed on 28.6.2008 along with delay condonation application. Review petition has been filed by legal representatives of Mohd. Farooq, who was respondent No. 3 in the writ petition (the only contesting respondent). The ground of delay is that against my judgment dated 6.12.2006, original respondent No. 3, Mohd. Farooq had filed S.L.P. (Civil) No. 3173 of 2007 before the Supreme Court on 12.2.2007, however in the S.L.P., original petitioner Sri Suresh Chandra Sharma, who had died on 10.7.1999, was made a respondent. Thereafter, substitution application/impleadment application was filed, however it was dismissed and S.L.P. was also dismissed on 7.2.2008 by the Supreme Court. Thereafter, review petition was filed before the Supreme Court, which was also dismissed on 8.5.2008. It is also stated that Mohd. Farooq died during pendency of the proceedings before the Supreme Court.
(3.) ONLY ground taken in the review petition is that original petitioner had died on 10.7.1999 and no substitution application was filed, hence my judgment dated 6.12.2006 is nullity as it is in favour of a dead person. On merit also, the said judgment has been assailed, however during arguments learned counsel for the applicant in review petition could not point out any error in my judgment dated 6.12.2006. He only confined his arguments to the plea of judgment being nullity having been passed in favour of a dead person.;