R.Karthikeyan v. the Tamil Nadu Generation and
Case brief
What is this about?
Madras High Court review application (Review Appln. No.102 of 2022, decided 19.02.2026; neutral citation 2026:MHC:749) by four individuals against the judgment dated 24.08.2018 in Writ Appeal No.58 of 2018 concerning rejection of a request for employment under the 'land looser' category involving TANGEDCO/Mettur Thermal Power Project and the District Collector, Salem. Grounds: Order XLVII Rule 1 read with Section 114 CPC; scope of review limited to error apparent; plea regarding non-consideration of the rehabilitation Scheme for job assistance characterised as impermissible re-hearing of the appeal; application dismissed with no costs. Bench: S.M.Subramaniam and C.Kumarappan JJ.; authored by C.Kumarappan J.
What did the court decide?
The submission that the writ appellate Court did not consider the rehabilitation Scheme comes within the category of re-hearing the appeal, which cannot be done by this Court under the review jurisdiction; only an error apparent alone can be considered in review.