D.N.PATEL, J. - (1.) This Civil Review application has been preferred by the original petitioner, whose writ petition being W.P.(S) No. 1856 of 2010 was dismissed by the Division Bench of this Court vide judgment and order dates 05.05.2010. For review of this order, the present application has been preferred.
(2.) Having heard learned counsels for both sides and looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, it appears that this applicant is seeking review of the order passed by the Division Bench of this Court dated 05.05.2010 in W.P.(S) No. 1856 of 2010, whereby, the order of the Central Administrative Tribunal, Patna Bench (Circuit Bench at Ranchi) in O.A. No. 03 of 2005 was confirmed and the writ petition preferred by this applicant was dismissed.
(3.) It appears that this applicant wants to re-argue out the case again on merit. This is not permissible in review. The scope of review is not the re-argument or rehearing of the case. This review application is not an appeal in disguise. Even erroneous order cannot be corrected by this Court in a review, by re-hearinf or by re-arguments. The remedy available with this applicant is to prefer an appeal. No new fact or an error apparent on the face of the record has been pointed out. Power of review may not be confused with the appellate power. Whatever argued out at length is, on the merit of the case and if any error is to be found out by this Court after lengthy argument, it is not an error apparent on the face of the record.;