COL. AVTAR SINGH SEKHON vs UNION OF INDIA

The Supreme Court held that a review of an earlier judgment is not routine and requires a manifest error undermining the order's soundness or resulting in a miscarriage of justice. In this case, the petitioner sought a review of the appointment of a brigadier, but the Court found no glaring omission or grave error justifying the review. The Court noted that the Government had abandoned the 1964 policy and was pursuing a new one, thus the petitioner had no rights under the old policy. The review petition was dismissed, affirming the earlier orders of May 7 and May 9, 1980.