Date: 25/05/2023

Relevance: GS-2: Functions of Judiciary

Key Phrases: National Capital Civil Service Authority, review petition, Article 239AA, National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991, DANICS, Article 137, Roopa Hurra v Ashok Hurra (2002), curative petition, patent error, Union of India v. Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd, 2013.

Why in News?

• The Central government filed a review petition in the Supreme Court challenging a previous judgment that granted control over administrative services to the Delhi government.
• This was a day after the government promulgated an ordinance to create a National Capital Civil Service Authority, empowered to recommend transfers, postings, and disciplinary actions relating to all Group A and DANICS officers (Delhi, Andaman & Nicobar, Lakshadweep, Daman, and Diu and Dadra and Nagar Haveli civil services).

Why has this review petition been filed?

• Reinstatement of LG's Authority:
  • The Centre's ordinance restores the final authority of the Delhi Lieutenant Governor (LG) in the transfers and postings of bureaucrats.
  • It strengthens the LG's role as an empowered administrator, allowing decisions on proposals considered or decided by the elected government.
• Supreme Court Judgement:
  • The dispute over whether the Lieutenant Governor or the Chief Minister would have powers over these administrative services in Delhi went to the Supreme Court and a judgment was delivered a few days ago.
  • The ruling places three constitutional principles – representative democracy, federalism, and accountability – to an elected government within the interpretation of Article 239AA.
  • In 1991, when Article 239 AA was inserted, Parliament also passed the Government of National Capital Territory of Delhi Act, 1991 to provide a framework for the functioning of the Legislative Assembly and the government of Delhi.
  • The Court clarified that Part XIV of the Constitution, which governs the employment of persons in public services under the union and states, is applicable to union territories, including Delhi.
• Transfer of Power:
  • The current ordinance transfers the authority previously held by the Delhi government to a statutory body comprising the Chief Minister of Delhi, the Chief Secretary, and the Principal Home Secretary of the Delhi government.

How does a review petition get heard in court?

• A judgment of the Supreme Court becomes the law of the land, according to the Constitution.
• The Supreme Court, under Article 137 of the Constitution, has the power to review its judgments or orders.
• Review petitions are entertained on specific grounds and aim to correct grave errors that have led to a miscarriage of justice.
• The court can review its rulings to correct "patent errors" but not minor mistakes of inconsequential importance.
• A review is accepted when there is a glaring omission, patent mistake, or grave error caused by judicial fallibility.

The rarity of review petitions:

• Review petitions are infrequent in the Supreme Court. The court typically refuses to review its judgments, as seen in the case of the Rafale deal in 2018.
• However, there have been instances where the court allowed review petitions, such as the March 2018 judgment diluting the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes Atrocities Act.

Grounds for seeking a review of an SC verdict:

• In a 2013 ruling, the Supreme Court laid down three grounds for seeking a review of its verdicts:
  1. The discovery of new and important matters or evidence that was not within the petitioner's knowledge or could not be produced by them, despite exercising due diligence.
  2. Mistake or error apparent on the face of the record.
  3. Any other sufficient reason. The Court clarified that "any sufficient reason" refers to a reason comparable to the other two grounds.
• Union of India v. Sandur Manganese & Iron Ores Ltd, 2013:
  • The court laid down nine principles on when a review is maintainable.
  • It emphasized that a review is not an appeal in disguise and should only be sought for correcting a patent error.
  • Mere differences in opinions or the possibility of alternative views are not sufficient grounds for a review.

Who can file a review petition?

• It is not necessary that only parties to a case can seek a review of the judgment on it.
• As per the Civil Procedure Code and the Supreme Court Rules, any person aggrieved by a ruling can seek a review.
• However, the court does not entertain every review petition filed. It exercises its discretion to allow a review petition only when it shows the grounds for seeking the review.

What is the procedure the Court uses to consider a review petition?

• Filing Deadline:
  • A review petition must be filed within 30 days from the date of the judgment or order.
• Judgment vs. Order:
  • A judgment is the final decision, while an order is an interim ruling.
• Condoning Delay:
  • The court may allow a review petition filed after the 30-day deadline if strong reasons justify the delay.
• Consideration Process:
  • Review petitions are typically heard "through circulation" by the judges in their chambers, without oral arguments from lawyers.
  • The same combination of judges who delivered the original order or judgment usually reviews the petition. If a judge is retired or unavailable, a replacement is chosen based on seniority.
• Oral Hearing:
  • In exceptional cases, an oral hearing may be granted, such as in death penalty cases where a Bench of three judges hears the petition in open court.

What happens if a review petition fails?

• As the court of last resort, the Supreme Court’s verdict cannot result in a miscarriage of justice.
• In Roopa Hurra v Ashok Hurra (2002), the court itself evolved the concept of a curative petition, which can be heard after a review is dismissed to prevent abuse of its process.
• A curative petition is also entertained on very narrow grounds like a review petition and is generally not granted an oral hearing.

Source: The Indian Express

Mains Question:

Q. Discuss the process of hearing a review petition in the Supreme Court and the grounds on which a review can be sought.