Madras High Court
REV.APPL/234/2026 of C.PALANI Vs THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER on 8 September 2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 08-09-2026
CORAM
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE S.M.SUBRAMANIAM
AND
THE HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY
REV.APPL No. 234 of 2026
C.Palani
… Applicant
-vs-
1. The District Educational Officer
Thirupathur, Vellore District.
2. The Secretary
Hindu Girls Hr.Sec.School,
Ambur, Vellore Dist.
3. S.Umadevi
… Respondents
Prayer: Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 r/w Section 114 of CPC
to review the order passed in W.A.No.245 of 2019 dated 28.06.2023 and thereby allow the Review Application.
For Applicant:
Mr.S.N.Ravichandran
For Respondents:
Mr.A.R.Suresh,
Spl. Govt, Pleader for R1 & R2
Mr.L.Chandra Kumar for R3
*****
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
O R D E R
(Order of the Court was made by D.Bharatha Chakravarthy,J.) The prayer in the Review Application is to review the judgment dated 28.06.2023 passed in W.A.Nos.245 of 2019 and 622 of 2022. By the aforesaid judgment, W.A.No.622 of 2022 was dismissed as not maintainable, inasmuch as it was filed as against the order refusing to review the order. W.A.No.245 of 2019, which was filed as against the original order passed in W.P.No.7680 of 2010, was allowed under specific terms mentioned therein in Paragraph No.23(ii) of the judgment. The partly unsuccessful appellant has filed the Review Application.
2. Mr.S.N.Ravichandran, learned counsel for Review Applicant would submit that having held that the appointment of R3 in the place of Review Applicant is invalid, the consequential benefits including service benefits have to be paid and the service of the Review Applicant should be reckoned from the original date on which error was committed.
3. We have considered the said submissions. On perusal of the judgment, it is not as if some error has crept in. After considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case, especially when earlier Review Application was filed before the learned Single Judge and the same was dismissed and thereafter, both the Writ Appeals were filed and the time lapse and considering the circumstances of the case, modified and moulded reliefs were granted consciously. Even if the same is erroneous, according to the Review Applicant, it is not a ground to review the judgment. This is an appeal in the guise of review and no other ground to review the judgment is made out.
In view thereof, the present Review Application is dismissed. No costs. (S.M.S.,J.) (D.B.C.,J.) 08-09-2026 Index: Yes/No Speaking/Non-speaking order Neutral Citation: Yes/No AR To:
1. The District Educational Officer Thirupathur, Vellore District.
2. The Secretary Hindu Girls Hr.Sec.School, Ambur, Vellore Dist.
S.M.SUBRAMANIAM,J. AND D.BHARATHA CHAKRAVARTHY,J. AR REV.APPL No. 234 of 2026 08-09-2026