Judgment B.N.Agrawal and Gurusharan Sharma JJ. 1. These three cases are being disposed of by one order, as common question is involved therein. 2. Civil Review No. 32 of 1987 has been filed for review of the order dated 6.5.1986 passed by this Court in C.W.J.C. No. 1413 of 1986 for payment of salary to opposite party nos. 1 to 24 and 27 treating them as teaching and non-teaching staff of Madhya Vidyalaya, Bhura within the district of Gaya. The said writ application was filed by the aforesaid opposite parties for direction to the respondents of the said writ application for payment of salary to them. 3. Civil Review No. 33 of 1987 has been filed for review of the order dated 6.5.1986 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1377 of 1986 whereby direction has been given by this Court for payment of salary to opposite party nos. 1 to 25 who were treated as teaching and non-teaching staff of Mahanthji Madhya Vidyalaya, Bhura within the district of Gaya. The said writ application was filed by the aforesaid opposite parties for direction to the respondents of the writ application to make payment of their salary. 4. Civil Review No.35 of 1987 has been filed for review of the order dated 6.5.1986 passed in C.W.J.C.No. 1131 of, 1986 whereby direction was given for payment of salary to the said opposite parties who were treated to be teaching and non-teaching staff of the said school. The said writ application was filed by the aforementioned opposite parties for directing the respondents of the writ application for making payment of their salary. 5. In all the aforesaid writ applications, separate counter affidavits were filed on behalf of District Superintendent of Education, Gaya and in the counter affidavits filed in respective cases, claims of the aforesaid opposite parties of these review applications were accepted. This Court allowed the writ applications and directed payment of salary to the writ petitioners on the basis of the stand taken in the counter affidavits. It may be stated that similar orders were passed by this Court in other cases on the basis of similar stand taken in the counter affidavits. 6. After disposal of the aforesaid writ applications, one Surendra Kumar filed a writ application before this Court by way of public interest litigation which gave rise to C.W.J.C. No. 5613 of 1986. It may be stated that similar orders were passed by this Court in other cases on the basis of similar stand taken in the counter affidavits. 6. After disposal of the aforesaid writ applications, one Surendra Kumar filed a writ application before this Court by way of public interest litigation which gave rise to C.W.J.C. No. 5613 of 1986. In the said writ application, it was alleged that orders were obtained in the aforesaid writ applications relating to these schools for which three review applications were filed as well as other schools by misrepresenting facts, as none of the three schools which are subject-matter in these review applications was functioning. This Court by order dated 16.12.1986 passed in the said writ application directed District Magistrate, Gaya to make thorough enquiry into the matter. Upon the said order, the District Magistrate, Gaya, made thorough enquiry and submitted a report dated 8.1.1987. According to the said report, orders were obtained from this Court in several writ applications in relation to various schools which never existed. So far three schools in question are concerned, it was reported that the same also never existed. 7. In the said writ application ultimately on 14.1.1987 this Court directed the Secretary, Department of Education, Government of Bihar, to appoint a high level committee to enquire about existence of the schools and their taking over. The Court further directed that in case it is found that District Superintendent of Education has made payment in respect of schools which either did not exist or have not been taken over by Government, then it will be open to the Government/Authority to move this Court for review of the order passed in different writ applications. Thereafter, a High Level Committee was constituted consisting of Director, Primary Education, Bihar, Deputy Development Commissioner, District Education Officer and District Superintendent of Education for holding enquiry. The Committee after holding enquiry submitted report dated 4.4.1987. From the said report, it appears that schools in question were not taken over in accordance with the provisions of the Taking Over Act. It has been stated on behalf of State that for review of similar orders passed in different writ applications, review applications have been filed before this Court. Reference in this connection was made to Civil Review nos. It has been stated on behalf of State that for review of similar orders passed in different writ applications, review applications have been filed before this Court. Reference in this connection was made to Civil Review nos. 34 and 43 of 1987 which were allowed on 23rd October, 1992 and similar orders passed in writ applications for payment of salary were recalled. 8. We find that orders were passed by this Court for payment of salary to the opposite parties of these cases on the basis of false and incorrect statements made on behalf of District Superintendent of Education that these schools were taken over while, as a matter of fact, these schools were neither nationalised nor taken over. Orders were passed in the aforesaid writ applications by this Court on the basis of false statement aforesaid. In our view, as orders were passed in the aforesaid writ applications upon non- existent ground, case for review is made out. 9. Accordingly, the three review applications are allowed, the orders dated 6.5.1986 passed in C.W.J.C. No. 1413 of 1986, C.W.J.C. No. 1377 of 1986 and C.W.J.C. No. 1131 of 1986 are recalled and the said writ applications are dismissed. In the circumstances of the case, we direct that parties shall bear their own costs.