M/S Csk Technologies v. South Eastern Coalfields Limited

NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR REVP No. 115 of 2020 M/s CSK Technologies, Through Its Proprietor Laxman Soma, S/o Shri Bhikshamaiah Soma, Aged About 61 Years, Having Its Registered Office At - 1st Floor, S.A. Towers, H-No. 3-5-885/1, Himayath Nagar, Near Old M.L.A. Qts, Hydrabad (Telangana) - 500029.

---- Petitioner

Versus

1. South Eastern Coalfields Limited Through General Manager (M.M), Post Box No. 60, Seepat Road, Bilaspur, Chhattisgarh.

2. M/s. Exide Industries Limited Through Its Managing Partner Gautam Chatterjee Having Its Corporate Office at Exide House, 59-E, Chowringhee Road, Kolkata (West Bengal) - 700020. --- Respondents For Appellant : Mr. Palash Tiwari, Advocate.

For Respondent No.1 : Mr. H.B. Agrawal, Sr. Advocate with Ms. Preeti Yadav and Utkarsh Shah, Advocate.

For Respondent No.2 : None.

Hon'ble Shri P. R. Ramachandra Menon, CJ Hon'ble Shri Parth Prateem Sahu, J Order On Board Per Parth Prateem Sahu, J 16/03/2021

1. By this petition, review of order dated 18.06.2020 is sought for by the petitioner.

2. Shri Palash Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner in pleadings of writ petition and his submission has not put to challenge Clause 4.7.1 of Purchase Manual of Coal India Limited, but while dismissing the writ petition this Court has only taken into consideration Clause 4.7.1 and arrived at a conclusion that there is no merit in the writ petition.

3. Shri H.B. Agrawal, learned Senior Counsel for respondent No.1/SECL submits that Clause 4.7.1 has taken into consideration for analyzing the

matter and the grounds raised by the writ petitioner, hence, there is no error apparent on the face of the record calling review of order passed by this Court.

4. We have heard learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the records.

5. Taking into consideration the nature of ground raised in the review petition, we do not find any error apparent on the face of record. The scope for entertaining the review petition is very limited as has been observed by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Meera Bhanja (smt) vs Nirmala Kumari Choudhury (smt) reported in (1995) 1 SCC 170. Recently, Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of Asharfi Devi vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Ors reported in (2019) 5 SCC 86 has held that every error whether factual or legal cannot be made subject matter of review, though it can be made subject matter of appeal.

6. In the given facts of the case and in the light of the above rulings rendered by Hon'ble Supreme Court, we do not find any error apparent on the face of record to entertain this review petition.

7. Accordingly, review petition stands dismissed. Sd/- Sd/- (P.R. Ramamchandra Menon) (Parth Prateem Sahu) Chief Justice Judge Jamal