IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1931 RP.No. 605 of 2000(Y) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN OP.12593/1999 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. K.S.E.B., REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, VAIDHUTHIBHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ASST. EXE. ENGINEER, ELECTRICAL MAJOR SECTION, KURICHY. ADV.P.P.THAJUDEEN. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- P.J.HORMIS, HORSONS RUBBERS, ITHITHANAM, CHANGANASSERY. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== R.P.No.605/2000 in O.P.No.12593/1999 ================== Dated this the 10th day of November, 2009 O R D E R This review petition is filed by the Kerala State Electricity Board to review the judgment dated 7.4.2000 in O.P.No.12593/1999. The judgment sought to be reviewed is a common judgment in a batch of original petitions, in which, the question involved was whether the Electricity Board could fix a cut of date for applying for concessional tariff applicable to industries which commenced production between 1.1.1992 and 31.12.1996 as per G.O. M.S. No.4/92/PD dated 6.2.1991. Ultimately, in the judgment a learned Single Judge of this Court directed thus: “9. In the above view of the matter, I quash Ext.P5, B.O.No.2030/97 (Pig. Com.2166/96) dated 17.9.1997 fixing 15.10.1997 as the cut off date for giving the applications and the consequential orders rejecting the applications for the benefit of the tariff. The Board has to consider the applications again.” 2. The contention of the Electricity Board is that in O.P.No. 12593/1999, the issue involved was not the validity of the cut of date, but the eligibility itself of the petitioners for availing of the benefit of pre-revisional tariff under the abovesaid notification and therefore, the judgment in respect of that original petition requires to be reviewed. Although it may be true, I am of opinion that the Electricity Board is not in any way prejudiced by the direction in the judgment in so far as 2 the only direction therein to the Board is to consider the application of the petitioner in the original petition again. The Board can very well consider the applications and decide the eligibility of the petitioners. In fact I am of opinion that it is the petitioners who should have filed this review petition for a reconsideration of their eligibility for the benefit under the notification, which they have not. In the above circumstances, I do not think that any review of the judgment is necessary at the instance of the Electricity Board. Accordingly, this review petition is closed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== R.P.No.605/2000 in O.P.No.12593/1999-Y ================== O R D E R 10th November, 2009