Mohammad Rafiq, J. - (1.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of Rule 33(2)(b) of the Rajasthan Service Rules, 1951 the respondents want the reversion of the petitioner to the post of U.D.C., which was confined to four years and on expiry of that period it should have been resulted in automatic restoration of promotion of the petitioner to the post of Office Assistant and that the respondents ought not to have been permitted to again consider the case of the petitioner afresh for the purpose of promotion.
(2.) THIS argument was specifically raised, contested and decided keeping in view the instructions issued by the Rajasthan High Court on administrative side, whereby the learned District Judge was directed that on expiry of period of four years, case of the petitioner should be considered for promotion on the post of Office Assistant from 7th April, 1979 on the basis of his suitability and if he is found suitable, then he could be promoted on the post of Office Assistant from 7th April, 1979 to 28th February, 1980. The review petition has in fact been filed for rehearing of an already decided matter. It does not point out any such error apparent on the face of the record, which may justify review of the judgment. I do not find any merit in this review petition and the same is dismissed.;