( 1 ) THIS is an application filed by Ahmedabad Electricity Company Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the applicant company) seeking partial modification/review of order dated 2/07/2001 passed in Special Civil Application No. 4578 of 1997 (Coram: Justice B. C. Patel (as he then was) and Justice D. A. Mehta ).

( 2 ) THE application is principally seeking deletion of direction issued in Para 69 (4) of the aforesaid judgment, whereby the applicant company has been restricted from supplying electric connection to a building unless Building Use Permission has been issued either by the Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and/or Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority, as the case may be.

( 3 ) MR. K. B. Pujara, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the applicant company, submitted that the applicant company seeks review/modification of the aforesaid judgment on the following grounds : (1) that the petition was filed in relation to fire safety system not being provided in cinema halls, factories and high-rise buildings, and hence the petition did not seek any relief against the applicant company. (2) that the petitioner had originally sought directions only against the erring officers, who are responsible for violation of the rules and regulations, and further seeking directions against other respondents seeking creation of an independent machinery as also a mandatory agency to monitor the working of fire safety systems. (3) that the applicant company is bound by provisions of Indian Electricity Act, 1910, Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 and the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948 and it functions within the parameters of the said statutory provisions. (4) that the applicant company is also bound by the Conditions of Supply and Miscellaneous Charges as framed under sec. 21 (2) of the Indian Electricity Act, 1910 and its rights and obligations are governed by the said statutory provisions. (5) that in these circumstances this Court, in the impugned judgment, could not have issued the impugned direction prohibiting the applicant company from supply of electric connections to the consumers who fulfilled the requisite conditions laid down by the statutory provisions governing the applicant company. (6) that the areas within which the applicant company functions extend far beyond the limits of Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation and the Ahmedabad Urban Development Authority. (7) that there are similarly situated licensees under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1948, namely, Gujarat Electricity Board, Surat Electricity Company, etc. who have been left out from being covered by such directions despite the fact that they operate within areas where similar high-rise buildings etc. have come up. (8) that Rule 50-A of the Indian Electricity Rules, 1956 specifically governs supply and use of energy in multistoryed buildings and there was no allegation that the applicant company was not following the conditions stipulated in the said Rule. (9) that the applicant company is a company registered under the Companies Act, 1956, and as a commercial organization it must be permitted to carry on its operations as stipulated by the various statutes which govern its functioning without being prohibited by way of the impugned direction issued in Para 69 (4) of the judgment dated 2. 7. 2001 as the entire petition nowhere raised an issue regarding any violation of any statute committed by the applicant company.

( 4 ) MR. Pujara also submitted that the order dated 4th October 2002, wherein various Special Leave Petitions being Nos. 15929-15930/2001 have been dismissed by the Honble Supreme Court, does not operate as a judgment so as to invoke the principle of merger and hence it was open to this court to undertake the exercise of review/modification as prayed for. In support of this proposition, reliance has been placed on a decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Kunhayammed and others v. State of Kerala and another, AIR 2000 SC 2587.

( 5 ) TAKING up the l