IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH JANUARY 2011 / 23RD POUSHA 1932 RP.No. 702 of 2009(L) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.29100/2006 Dated 25/07/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. KERALA STATE ELECTIRICITY BOARD REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE FINANCIAL ADVISER & CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER, BILLING SUPERVISION UNIT, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI-18. BY ADV. SRI. ASOK M.CHERIYAN, SC, KSEB RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER: -------------------------- K.M.RAGINI, W/O.V.K.SUGATHAN, RETIRED SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT (NON-CADRE) KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD RESIDING AT KARYAPARAMBIL HOUSE, NEAR CEMETERY, CHITOOR ROAD, KOCHI-682 018. R1 BY SRI.K.P.DANDAPANI, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: sts S.SIRIJAGAN, J. ----------------------------------------------------- R.P.No.702 of 2009 in W.P.(C) No. 29100 of 2006 ------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of January, 2011 JUDGMENT The Kerala State Electricity Board has filed this review petition for review of judgment dated 25.07.2008 in WP(C) 29100/06 which reads as follows: “The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayer:- “Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 1st respondent to grant the petitioner Second Time Bound Higher Grade (18 years grade) with effect from 19.12.1989 in the scale of Rs.3325/-, the pay scale attached to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer and 25 years' grade with effect from 01.04.1990 in the scale of Rs.3375-5035 attached to the post of Assistant Accounts Officer, notionally, revise the pension accordingly and arrears thereto” On 27.6.2008, this Court passed the following order:- “In case no counter affidavit is filed within two weeks from today, it will be taken that the respondents have no objection in allowing the writ petition.” There is no counter affidavit yet. Therefore, the writ petition is allowed in terms of the prayer extracted above”. R.P.No.702 of 2009 in W.P.(C) No. 29100 of 2006 2 2. In so far as the writ petition has been allowed only on the ground that no counter affidavit has been filed, taking a lenient view, I am inclined to grant the Board another opportunity to conduct the matter on merits. 3. Accordingly, the review petition is allowed and the judgment dated 25.07.2010 is recalled restoring the writ petition to file. 4. However, I find that there is considerable delay in filing the review petition and Board has not shown any satisfactory explanation for the delay. In the above circumstance, I am of opinion that petitioners should pay the costs to the respondents in the review petition, which I quantify at Rs.5,000/-. Payment of costs shall be a condition for allowing the review petition and shall be paid within two weeks. If the cost is not paid within two weeks the review petition would stand dismissed. S.SIRIJAGAN, JUDGE. rkc