Case Note & Summary
The present Review Application was filed by E. Murali and G. Muniratnam (the 2nd applicant was already dismissed as withdrawn) seeking review of an order dated 24.11.2021 passed in W.A.No.844 of 2013. The applicants were employees of the Corporation of Chennai and had sought promotion to the post of Licence Inspector. The learned counsel for the applicants contended that the applicants had passed the requisite Departmental Examination for promotion, but this ground was not considered by the Court. However, the applicants admitted that the crucial date for preparation of the panel for promotion was 2008, and promotions were granted to other eligible candidates in 2009. Since the applicants were not found qualified on the crucial date, their cases were not considered. The Court held that re-adjudication of merits in review proceedings is impermissible. The scope of review cannot be expanded for adjudication of grounds on merits. Even non-consideration of certain grounds raised on merits does not provide scope for maintaining a review application; only in the event of an error apparent on the face of the record may the Court entertain a review. The Court found no error apparent warranting exercise of review jurisdiction. Consequently, the Review Application was dismissed. No costs.
Headnote
A) Civil Procedure - Review Jurisdiction - Error Apparent - Scope of Review - Review Application is not an appeal in disguise; re-adjudication of merits is impermissible. Even non-consideration of certain grounds raised on merits does not provide scope for review unless there is an error apparent on the face of the record. (Paras 3) B) Service Law - Promotion - Crucial Date - Departmental Examination - The crucial date for preparation of panel for promotion to the post of Licence Inspector was 2008; applicants were not found qualified on that date and thus not considered. (Paras 2)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the review application can be entertained on the ground that certain merits were not considered in the original judgment.
Final Decision
Review Application dismissed. No costs.
Law Points
- Review jurisdiction limited to error apparent on face of record
- Re-adjudication of merits impermissible in review
- Non-consideration of grounds not a ground for review
