Synopsis

The review applicant filed a review petition seeking review of a judgment dated 7th January 2026, by which the High Court had dismissed his writ petition challenging cancellation of his fair price shop license. The order of cancellation dated 21st May 2019 was passed by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Ambedkar Nagar, and was affirmed in appeal by the Deputy Commissioner, Ayodhya Division, Ayodhya on 8th December 2025. The review application was filed by a new counsel (Ms. Saima Khan), whereas the original writ petition was filed and argued by Sri Ajay Kumar Pandey, Advocate.

The State raised a preliminary objection that a review petition cannot be filed by a counsel who was not the counsel in the original proceedings. The court upheld this objection, relying on M. Poornachandran v. State of T.N. and T.N. Electricity Board v. N. Raju Reddiar. The court held that a review petition is not a rehearing or an appeal; it can only be filed by the counsel who had advanced submissions in the original proceedings, unless that counsel is no longer available. The review applicant’s counsel had obtained a no‑objection certificate from the earlier counsel, but the court held that this was not sufficient – the principle is that a new counsel would not be in a position to point out what submissions were advanced at the time of the original hearing. The court also examined the merits and found no error apparent on the face of the record. The review application was dismissed.

Court: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Coram: Honourable Subhash Vidyarthi, J.

Date of Judgment: 1st April 2026

Citation: 2026:AHC-LKO:22852 (Civil Misc Review Application Defective No. 41 of 2026)

Core Law: Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 114 and Order 47 Rule 1 (review); Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 (writ jurisdiction); U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution) Order, 2016 – Para 13(3) (appeal), Para 7(8) (inquiry)

2. Legal Framework

Major laws and provisions involved

• Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 – Section 114 (review of judgments); Order 47 Rule 1 (grounds for review: discovery of new evidence, mistake or error apparent on face of record, any other sufficient reason)

• Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 226 (writ jurisdiction)

• U.P. Essential Commodities (Regulation of Sale and Distribution) Order, 2016 – Para 7(8) (inquiry procedure for fair price shop licensees); Para 13(3) (appeal provision)

• Allahabad High Court Rules, Chapter V Rule 12 – Provision for filing review applications before the High Court

Key legal principles applied

Review jurisdiction is not an appeal in disguise: A review is not a rehearing of the matter on merits. The power of review is limited to correcting a mistake or error that is apparent on the face of the record – an error that stares one in the face without requiring elaborate argument. It cannot be used to substitute a view or to reargue the case.

Review petition must be filed by the same counsel who appeared in the original proceedings: The Supreme Court in M. Poornachandran and T.N. Electricity Board v. N. Raju Reddiar held that a review petition filed by a counsel who was not the arguing counsel in the original matter is not maintainable. A new counsel would not know what submissions were advanced at the time of hearing, and a review petition is not an opportunity to raise new grounds. This practice is not conducive to the healthy practice of the profession.

Exception for non‑availability of original counsel: The Allahabad High Court Rules permit a review to be heard by a different judge if the original judge is no longer attached to the court. However, this analogy does not extend to counsel. Unless the original counsel is no longer practicing or is unavailable, a review cannot be filed through a new counsel simply because the party chooses to engage a different lawyer.

Principles of natural justice in fair price shop inquiries: The inquiry under the U.P. Essential Commodities Order is summary in nature. It does not require a full‑fledged departmental enquiry with right to cross‑examine w

... Upgrade to a Premium Plan to view the full judgment.