The State Of Tamil Nadu v. K.Rajamankickam
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED : 30.01.2024 CORAM :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.S. SUNDAR AND THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE N.SENTHILKUMAR 1.The State of Tamil Nadu rep.by its Secretary to Government Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department, St George Fort, Secretariat Chennai 600 009.
2.The Commissioner Municipal Administration Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.
3.The Commissioner Komarapalayam Municipality Namakkal District.
.. Petitioners Vs.
K.Rajamanickam ... Respondent
Prayer : Review Application filed under Order 47 Rule 1 read with Section 114 of CPC to review the order made in WP.No.20486/2014 dated 01.09.2015 by allowing the review petition.
For Petitioners : Mrs.S.Anitha, Spl.GP For Respondent : Mr.S.Rajesh Kanna
ORDER
[Order of the Court was made by S.S.SUNDAR, J.,] (1)The present Review Application is filed as against the order passed in WP.No.20486/2014 holding that the respondent herein is entitled for regularisation of his service in regular time scale of pay on completion of three years of service.
(2)It is learnt from the records that a Division Bench of this Court earlier, in a batch of writ petitions, did not accept the case of the employees that they are entitled to regularisation on completion of three years. However, the said order of the Division Bench in Danasekaran and Others Vs. State of Tamil Nadu and Others reported in 2013 [6] CTC 593, was subject to review and ultimately, the review application was allowed.
Based on the subsequent judgment of the Full Bench, reviewing the judgment in Danasekaran's case [cited supra], this Court has allowed the writ petitions.
(3)Therefore, the present review application is liable to be dismissed on merits on the basis of the subsequent judgment of the Full Bench of this Court.
(4)However, the learned Special Government Pleader appearing for the petitioners states that the order reviewing the judgment of the Full Bench in Danasekaran's case is the subject matter of Special Leave Petition before the Hon'ble Supreme Court. It is in the said circumstances, the petitioners have filed the present review petition. (5)From the grounds raised, this Courts finds no error apparent on the face of the record. The Hon'ble Supreme Court and this Court, has repeatedly held that a review is not an appeal in disguise and unless there is an error apparent on the face of the record, review application is not maintainable. Even if an error has to be detected by a process of reasoning, review cannot be entertained. This Court is also of the view that this review application does not fall within the scope of Order 47 Rule 1 of CPC.
(6)It is to be noted that a review is also not maintainable on the basis of the subsequent judgments or decisions in similar matter. Therefore, leaving it open to the petitioners to file a Special Leave Petition to challenge the order before the Hon'ble Supreme Court, this Review Application stands dismissed.
[S.S.S.R., J.] [N.S., J.] 30.01.2024 AP Internet : Yes To 1.The Secretary to Government State of Tamil Nadu Municipal Administration & Water Supply Department, St George Fort, Secretariat Chennai 600 009.
2.The Commissioner Municipal Administration Chepauk, Chennai 600 005.
3.The Commissioner Komarapalayam Municipality Namakkal District.
S.S. SUNDAR, J., and N.SENTHILKUMAR, J., AP 30.01.2024