Desh Rattan Dubey vs Board Of Control For Cricket In India on 15 December, 2022
In case notice is issued, the review petition will be listed for
hearing, after notice is served. This procedure is meant to
save the time of the Court and to preclude frivolous review
petitions being filed and heard in open court. However, with
a view to avoid this procedure of "no hearing", we find that
sometimes applications are filed for "clarification",
"modification" or "recall" etc. not because any such
clarification, modification is MA 1572/2021 indeed
necessary but because the applicant in reality wants a review
and also wants a hearing, thus avoiding listing of the same in
6 CM No. 2668/2022 in
WP(C) No. 4524/2019
chambers by way of circulation. Such applications, if they
are in substance review applications, deserve to be rejected
straight away inasmuch as the attempt is obviously to bypass
Order XL Rule 3 relating to circulation of the application in
chambers for consideration without oral hearing. By
describing an application as one for "clarification" or
"modification", -- though it is really one of review -- a
party cannot be permitted to circumvent or bypass the
circulation procedure and indirectly obtain a hearing in the
open court. What cannot be done directly cannot be
permitted to be done indirectly. (See in this connection a
detailed order of the then Registrar of this Court in Sone Lal
v. State of U.P. [(1982) 2 SCC 398] deprecating a similar
practice.)