IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2009 / 27TH SRAVANA 1931 RP.No. 751 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.30822/2000 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD, VYDYUTHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. CHIEF ENGINER, (ELECTRICAL) GENERAL, VYDHUDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC FOR KSEB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CHRISTUDAS DANIEL, S/O. DANIEL, SUPERINTENDENT, BOARD SECRETARIAT, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. G.JOHN KUTTY, S/O. GEORGE, SUPERINTENDENT, BOARD SECRETARIAT, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. M.VIJAYAMOHANAN PILLAI, S/O. MADHAVAN PILLAI, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (ELECTRICAL GENERAL), VYDHUDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. K.T. JACOB, THARAKAN, S/O. K.C. JOSEPH, THARAKAN, RETIRED SUPRENTENDENT, RES. AT KPI 416/B, MUNDAKKAL LINE, NALANCHIRA POST, THIRUVANANTHAPURM. 5. K. KRIPAKARAN, S/O. A.A. KUNJAN, SUPERINTENDENT , OFFICE OF THE FINANCE ADVISOR AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER, VYDHUDHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. GEORGE THOMAS, S/O. THOMAS, RCA SECTION, OFFICE OF THE FINANCE ADVIOR AND CHIEF ACCOUNTS OFFICER, VYDHUDHI BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. By R RAJESH NAIR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... R.P.NO. 751 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 18TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2009 ORDER This review petition is filed by KSEB on the premise that the judgment sought to be reviewed, in a writ petition filed by six persons, contains a direction to consider individual representations of petitioners and similarly situated persons. The plea of the Board is that the benefit of the judgment be confined to the writ petitioners. 2. Having considered the judgment sought to be reviewed, I do not find that there is any error of jurisdiction or error apparent on the face of record, in as much as the directions in the last paragraph of the judgment is a natural outcome of the findings in paragraph 5. At any rate, I do not find any ground for review of the judgment. Review petition fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/19/8