IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 19TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 28TH KARTHIKA 1929 RP.No. 658 of 2003(A) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.17648/2003 Dated 06/06/2003 .................... EVIEW PETITIONER/5TH RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------- SUBRAMANIYAN S/O. VASUDEVA ACHARI, SINDHU JWELLERY WORKS, THEKKEPPURAM, MANIKKOTH PO KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.K.RAJEEVAN SMT.T.SUDHAMANI RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER AND RESPONDENT NO.1 TO 4 ------------------------------------------------ 1. SHAMSUDEEN S/O. KUNHIPPATHU, RESIDING AT THEKKEPPURAM, P.O.MANIKKOTH 2. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDHUTHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. THE DEPUTY CHIEF ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL CIRCLE, KASARAGOD. 4. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ELECTRRICAL SECTION, CHITHERI P.O. 5. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL SECTION, CHITHERI P.O. R2 TO 5 BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. .................................................................... R.P. No.658 of 2003 in W.P.(C) No.17648 of 2003 .................................................................... Dated this the 19th day of November, 2007. ORDER I do not think there is any justification to review the judgment passed five years back. The review petitioner was only a respondent in the W.P. and the review is filed seeking electricity connection in a building owned by the brother of the petitioner in the W.P.(C). Even though R.P. was filed four years back, petitioner did not pursue the same. In the circumstances, I dismiss the R.P. leaving freedom to the petitioner to file writ petition for appropriate relief if there is any case. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms