Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (Hpcl) v. M/S Navin Kumar Chopda

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR

1. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited (HPCL) Limited (HPCL), A Government Of India Enterprises, Through Its Director Having Its Registered Office At Petroleum House , 17, Jamshedji Tata Road, Mumbai- 400020.

2. Hindustan Petroleum Corporation Limited(HPCL) Through Senior Category Manager CPO (MKTG)- 9th Floor, Marathon Futurex Building A- Wing, Mafatlal Mills Compounds, NM Joshi Marg , Mumbai- 400013.

---- Petitioners

Versus

1. M/s Navin Kumar Chopda Through Its Proprietor- Navin Kumar Chopda, Aged About 43 Years, Transport Contractor, Having Its Office At FCI Road , Tarbahar Fatak, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

2. M/s Maa Sharda Road Carriers 29/121, Gali No. 06, PhaseI , Shriram Nagar, Raipur, Chhattisgarh.

3. M/s Ishika Transport Kurud- Road- Kohka, PO- Supela, District- Durg, C.G.- 490023.

4. M/s Uma Shankar Shukla 39, Vardhman Colony, Rajiv Gandhi Ward, Jagdalpur, Cg- 494009.

5. M/s Indu Transport Indu Udyan Chowk, Jarhabhata Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

6. M/s Balaji Bulk Movers F.C.I Road, Tarbahar, Bilaspur, Chhattigarh.

7. M/s C.G. Andhra Road Lines Jr. MIG- 46-A, Vaishali Nagar, Bhilai- District- Durg, Chhattisgarh.

8. M/s Satya Ventures Santi Para, Bus Stand, Bhilai-3, DistrictDurg, Chhattisgarh. Durg- 490021.

9. M/s Anand Transport Corporation House No. C- 179, Bajaj Colony- 2, New Rajendra Nagar, Raipur, Cg- 492006. 10.M/s Rajwardhan Singh Shop No. 113, Kuber Plaza, Magar

Para, Road, Bilaspur. Chhattisgarh.

11.M/s Ganesh Dhruv Shop No. 21, Taha Complex Bhartiya Nagar Chowk, Vyapar Vihar, Road , Bilaspur, Chhattigarh. ---- Respondents For Petitioners :- Mr. Ali Asgar, Advocate Hon'ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag.CJ Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, J.

Order On Board By Prashant Kumar Mishra, Ag.CJ 21/06/2021

1. This review application has been preferred against our judgment dated 25.3.2021 in WPC No.3162 of 2018 and other connected matters on submission that issue No.3 framed in paragraph 13 of the order has not been decided.

2. If the issue has not been decided by this Court, there is no occasion to file any review application. The review application is maintainable only when an issue is decided and the same is based on error apparent on the face of the record. Even otherwise, the review applicant has already decided the representation preferred by M/s Navin Kumar Chopda against which a separate writ petition has already been preferred by M/s Navin Kumar Chopda.

3. It is well settled principle of law that under the garb of review petition, the petitioner should not be permitted to argue the entire case afresh, which would amount to convert the review petition into an appeal and the same is not

sustainable in law. (See: Meera Bhanjan v. Smt. Nirmal Kumar Chowdhary, AIR 1995 SC 455, Lily Thomas etc. v. Union of India and others, AIR 2000 SC 1650, Ajit Kumar Rath v. State of Orissa and others, AIR 2000 SC 85, Government of T.N. & Others v. M. Ananchu Asari and others, (2005) 2 SCC 332, and Kerla State Electricity Board v. Hitech Electrothermicsm & Hydropower Ltd. and others, (2005) 6 SCC 651.

4. As a sequel, the review petition, sans substratum is liable to be and is hereby dismissed.

SD/- SD/- (Prashant Kumar Mishra) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Acting Chief Justice Judge Ayushi