IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH AUGUST 2008 / 15TH SRAVANA 1930 RP.No. 849 of 2008(Y) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.25822/2002 Dated 01/07/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONERS:- -------------------------------- .S. RAVINDRAN NAIR, PROPRIETOR, ROCKS - KURUVICHALIL, P.O. ROAD, PATTIMATTOM P.O., KIZHAKKAMBALAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.RAVINDRAN NAIR (PARTY IN PERSON) RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDHYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARY POWER (A) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, K.S.E.B. ELECTRICAL DIVISION, PERUMBAVOOR. 4. 4TH ADLL. RESPONDENT:- THE SECRETARYGENERAL, CENTRAL ELECTRICITY AUTHORITY, “SEWA BHAVAN”, R.K. PURAM, NEW DELHI 110 066. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB FOR R1 & 3 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. ADV. SRI.T.SANJAY FOR R4. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------- R.P. No.849 OF 2008 IN O.P.No.25822 OF 2002 ----------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of August, 2008 O R D E R ~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The writ petitioner is the review petitioner. The petitioner started an industrial unit in which commercial production commenced on 10.3.1996. Therefore, by virtue of Ext.P4 order, he was entitled to get electrical energy at pre-1992 tariff for a period of five years. But, the petitioner could not produce the eligibility certificate, within the time limit fixed by the K.S.E.B, which was on 15.10.1997. He produced it only on 17.10.1997. So, the said benefit was not extended to him. But, the fixation of cut of date for the production of eligibility certificate was struck down by this Court and this Court directed to accept the certificate produced after the cut of date and grant benefits to the units concerned. It was also ordered that if any of the eligible units were compelled to pay ruling tariff, the excess amount paid by them with reference to the pre-1992 tariff shall R.P. No.849/2008 2 be refunded to them. In this case the petitioner was also eligible to get that benefit. In the judgment under review, we noticed that the said benefit was already extended to him and therefore he is not entitled to get the relief sought in the writ petition. But, this review petition is filed contending that the mere payment of the difference in the money collected will not satisfy the requirement of the decision of this Court based on which the excess amount collected was paid. If he was allowed to use the electrical energy in time, the same would have been much beneficial to him and his unit might have survived also. The difference in the amount collected now paid to him can never be treated as the equivalent amount directed to be paid by this Court. So, the petitioner prays for review of the judgment. 2. The above claim was the point raised in the writ petition. We have considered that point and did not accept that. But, if the petitioner feels that the said view taken by this Court is wrong, his remedy lies before the Appellate Court. This review petition cannot be converted into a first appeal against our own R.P. No.849/2008 3 judgment. So, no ground has been made out warranting review of our judgment. The claim of the petitioner to seek reliefs against the commissions and omissions of the K.S.E.B., which allegedly caused damages to him is left open. The rights, if any, in this regard of the petitioner will not be affected by the judgment under review and also by this order in this review petition. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps