Allowed

K.S.E.Board,Rep.by Its Chairman & Others v. C.K.Narayanan and Another

Kerala HC5 Nov 2009RP/1063/2009

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala, in a review petition filed under Section 114 of the Kerala High Court Rules, allowed the review and recalled the judgment dated 26/06/2009. The court held that the original judgment was vitiated by an error on the face of the record regarding the misreliance on one Government Order instead of another.

What did the court decide?

The review petition was allowed and the judgment dated 26/06/2009 was recalled.

K.S.E.Board,Rep.by Its Chairman & Others Vs… — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2009)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 5TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 14TH KARTHIKA 1931

¶5

RP.No. 1063 of 2009(F)

¶6

---------------------(AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 26/06/2009 IN WP(C) NO.35970/2003)

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER(S): /RESPONDENTS

¶8

----------------------

¶9

1. KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (HRM), VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM,PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶11

3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PERUMBAVOOR.

¶12

BY ADV. SRI.K.S.ANIL, SC, KSEB

¶13

RESPONDENT(S): /PETITIONER/ADDL. RESPONDENT IMPLEADED

¶14

---------------

¶15

1. C.K.NARAYANAN, (ASSISTANT ENGINEER RETD. ELECTRICAL SECTION, KSEB, KARUKUTTY), CHENRANGARETH HOUSE, KATHIKUTAM P.O., KORATTY,THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶16

2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,(ELECTRICAL), COIMBATORE CENTRAL ELECTRICAL DIVISION, CENTRAL PWD, BHAGYALAXMI COMPLEX, 07-108, NSR ROAD, SAI BABA COLONY, COIMBATORE.

¶17

MR.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN, ASG

¶18

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶19

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶20

R.P.No.1063 of 2009 in W.P.(C.) No.35970 of 2003

¶21

Dated, this the 5^th day of November, 2009

¶22

O R D E R

¶23

Heard both sides.

¶24

As it is now pointed out in the review petition, reference to paragraph 3 of the judgment itself show that, while reliance was placed on GO(P) 369/87/Fin dated 31/03/1987 in the counter affidavit, this Court referred to G.O.(P) 367/87/Fin dated 31/03/1987, and decided the case on that basis. Along with the review petition, a copy of GO(P) 369/87/Fin dated 31/03/1987 referred to above has also been produced, which shows that the provisions are different from the provisions of GO(P) 367/87/Fin..

¶25

For these reasons, I am satisfied that the judgment is vitiated for errors on the face of it. For that reason, the review is allowed, and the judgment is recalled.

¶26

Post the writ petition for hearing.

¶27

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)

¶28

K.S.E.Board,Rep.by Its Chairman & Others v. C.K.Narayanan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.S.E.Board,Rep.by Its Chairman & Others v. C.K.Narayanan and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Swapna v.Nair Vs Smt.Chitra

P.Haridasan Vs Secretary, Rta, Kzd. (Taxation Officer)

K.G.Ajayakumar Vs M.R.Amalamma

Velayudhan P.& Others Vs State of Kerala & Others

Mathiri Davidson Vs Chairman & Managing Director,Kbps

P.G.Radhakrishnan Vs State of Kerala