SC – HC Cannot Use Review Jurisdiction to Revisit Same Issue

Case Details: High Court of Madhya Pradesh vs. Jyotsna Dohalia - [2025] 178 taxmann.com 593 (SC)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

• Pamidighantam Sri Narasimha & Atul S. Chandurkar, JJ.
• Atul S. Chandurkar, J.

Facts of the Case

In the instant case, Respondents had participated in the recruitment process for the post of Civil Judge (Entry Level) and secured marks below the cut-off marks. Respondents filed a writ petition challenging the results of the preliminary examination, which was dismissed by the High Court vide order dated 7 May 2024.

Respondents thereafter filed a review application seeking recall of the order dated 7-5-2024, and the Division Bench, in exercise of review jurisdiction, proceeded to hold that the order dated 7-5-2024 suffered from various errors and recalled the order dated 7-5-2024.

The High Court was thereafter directed to recompute cut-off marks by applying a ratio of 1:10, and a fresh main examination was to be held in respect of those eligible candidates who had secured marks between the earlier cut-off and the recomputed cut-off marks.

It was noted that when respondents could not furnish any explanation in regard to the reduction in cut-off marks, it was not open for the High Court, in exercise of review jurisdiction, to reconsider the very same contention and hold otherwise.

Supreme Court Held

The Supreme Court held that there was no occasion to invoke its review jurisdiction or direct a fresh main examination; thus, the impugned order passed by the High Court in exercise of its review jurisdiction was to be set aside.

List of Cases Refferred to

• Monica Yadav v. High Court of Madhya Pradesh [Writ Petition (Civil) No.1380 of 2023, dated 15-12-2023] (para 4),
• Garima Khare v. High Court of Madhya Pradesh [Special Leave Petition (Civil) No.9570 of 2024, dated 1-4-2024] (para 5),
• Recruitment of Visually Impaired in Judicial Services, Inre 2025 INSC 300 (para 7),
• Northern India Caterers (India) Ltd. v. Governor of Delhi 1979 taxmann.com 186 (SC) (para 9),
• Kamlesh Verma v. Mayawati (2013) 8 SCC 320 (para 9) and Canara Bank v. Debasis Das (2003) 4 SCC 557 (para 9).