| The Review Petitioner is the respondent in Appeal No. P/022/2019. The review respondent/appellant is a domestic consumer under Electrical Section, Thiruvalla having consumer number 7582. On 20th July 2018, the review respondent/appellant complained the faultiness of the meter and the meter was replaced on 17th December 2018. While being so, the review respondent/appellant was aggrieved with the exorbitant bills issued for the months of 9/2018 & 10/2018, issued by the review petitioner/respondent on 17-11-2018 for Rs. 3,360/- and for the months of 11/2018 & 12-2018 for Rs. 2,605/- by taking the average consumption of 356 units. The lodged complaint before the CGRF, Kottarakkara requesting to waive off the excess charges levied in the said bills. The CGRF had dismissed the petition on the ground that the bills issued by the respondent are in order and the petition is devoid of any merits, vide order no. OP No. 158/2018 dated 22-02-2019. Aggrieved by this, the appeal petition filed by the review respondent/appellant was found having merits and was allowed to the extent it was ordered. Against the order, the review petitioner submitted this review petition stating that there is an error apparent on the face of the orders of Ombudsman and requested to review the order dated 20/05/2019 in Appeal No 022/2019 and to issue a revised order upholding the decision of CGRF.
In the review petition nothing is pointed out which escaped the notice of this Authority while disposing the appeal petition. The review petitioner is challenging the decision of this Authority by raising fresh arguments in the review petition. The review jurisdiction is limited to rectify a mistake or an error which is apparent on the face of records and it cannot be used as appellate jurisdiction. This Authority has considered all the arguments while disposing the appeal petition. A decision once rendered by a competent Authority/Court on a matter in issue between the parties after a full enquiry should not be liable to be agitated over again before the same Authority/Court. If the review petitioner is aggrieved by the order of this Authority, it is free for him to challenge that order before the appropriate upper authority. In this background, this Authority didn’t find any reason to intervene the order already issued. In view of the above discussions, I hold that review petition is not maintainable and hence rejected. Having decided as above, it is ordered accordingly. |
|
|
Data
|
| Size |
96.28 KB |
| Downloads |
1163 |
| Created |
2019-10-03 06:12:41 |
|
|
|
Overview
Search Downloads
Submit file
Up
REVIEW PETITION No. 04/2019 IN APPEAL PETITION No. P/022/2019 The Assistant Executive Engineer, Thiruvalla, 