JUDGMENT Mansoor Ahmad Mir, ACJ (Oral) Through the medium of these applications, the review petitioners have sought leave of this Court to file Review Petitions on the grounds that they are adversely affected by the judgment rendered by the Division Bench of this Court dated 12.12.2012 in different writ petitions. After the decision in the writ petitions, selection list was drawn which has adversely affected the selected candidates who were not party(s) in the said writ petitions. 2.The moot question is whether the leave can be granted to the review petitioners in the given circumstances. 3. It is beaten law of the land that if a person is affected by an order, judgment or interim directions of the Court, who is not party to the lis or was not party to the lis, can seek leave to file review, provided he is adversely affected. 4. While examining the record and the order made by this Court and the reply/objections filed by the State and by the Board, it appears that the petitioners are being adversely affected by the judgment of this Court, thus, their rights are being jeopardized. 5. In view of the above peculiar circumstances, leave to file review deserves to be granted. 6. The same question arose for consideration before the apex Court in Shivdeo Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and others reported in 1963 SC 1909, Ramchandra Shankar Deodhar and others vs. State of Maharashtra and others, AIR 1974 SC 259 , Pohla Singh alilas Pohla Ram (D) by LRs and others vs. State of Punjab and others, AIR 2004 SC 3329 , Haridas Das vs. Smt. Usha Rani Banik & Ors, AIR 2006 SC 1634 and State of West Bengal and others vs. Kamal Sengupta and another (2008) 8 SCC 612 , where the leave to file review was granted. Accordingly, the leave to file review is granted. The applications are accordingly disposed of. 7. Review petitions are already registered. Issue notice. Waived by the learned Counsel appearing for the respective respondents. List on 1st April, 2014.