Dismissal of review application when prior similar case found no error apparent on record.

The National Technical Research Organisation (Review Applicant) filed Review Application No. 75/2025 concerning O.A. No. 3626/2023 and Review Application No. 80/2025 concerning O.A. No. 4016/2023

These applications sought a review of previous orders issued by the Central Administrative Tribunal

The Review Respondents’ counsel placed on record a decision in M.A. No. 4600/2025 in R.A. No. 172/2025 in O.A. No. 3625/2023, decided on November 4, 2025, by a Coordinate Bench, where a similar review application was dismissed for being devoid of merit

Whether the delay in filing Review Applications No. 75/2025 and 80/2025 should be condoned

Whether there is an error apparent on the face of the record warranting review of the final order dated April 22, 2024, in O.A. No. 3625/2023, the underlying original application for which the review was sought

Whether the present Review Applications (R.A. No. 75/2025 and R.A. No. 80/2025) should be dismissed based on the precedent set by a Coordinate Bench in a similar matter

The Tribunal applied the principle that delay in filing review applications can be condoned for sufficient reasons, as implicitly demonstrated by the allowance of Miscellaneous Application No. 1815/2025 and No. 1922/2025

The primary rule for review applications is that a review is warranted only if there is an "error apparent on the face of the record," and not merely a repetition of arguments already considered and dealt with in the original proceedings

Furthermore, the principle of stare decisis or judicial consistency in similar matters by Coordinate Benches was also considered

The Tribunal first condoned the delay in filing the Review Applications, stating "For the reasons mentioned in the Miscellaneous Application, we allow the same and condone the delay..."

Regarding the merits of the review, the Tribunal adopted the reasoning from a decision by a Coordinate Bench in M.A. No. 4600/2025 in R.A. No. 172/2025 in O.A. No. 3625/2023, dated November 4, 2025

In that precedent, the Coordinate Bench found "no error apparent on the face of the record warranting review," concluding that the "contentions raised in the review application are, in essence, a repetition of the arguments already considered and dealt with in the original proceedings"

Since the present matters were deemed "identical in nature" and involved "similar grounds", the Tribunal applied the same reasoning, concluding that no error apparent on the face of the record existed in the present case

However, based on the precedent set by a Coordinate Bench and finding no error apparent on the face of the record, the Tribunal dismissed Review Application No. 75/2025 and Review Application No. 80/2025

All pending M.A.s, if any, also stood disposed of, with no order as to costs