A review petition cannot be a mere rehearing of an appeal; it must show errors apparent on the record.

P.V. BALAKRISHNAN, JJ.

…....................................................................

R.P.No.1325 of 2025 in W.A.No.248 of 2024 …....................................................................

Dated this the 30^th day of January, 2026 ORDER This review petition is filed by the 1^st respondent in W.A.No.248 of 2024, seeking review of the judgment dated

27.08.2025, passed in it.

2. Heard Adv. Ranjith Thampan, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the review petitioner and Adv. S. Sreekumar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent.

3. The writ appeal was disposed of on merits as per judgment dated 27.08.2025. What the review petitioner attempts, in the review petition by raising the grounds as stated therein, and especially grounds 'C' to 'G' is nothing, but a rehearing of the appeal on merits, which is impermissible.

4. The Hon'ble Apex Court has time and again categorically held that a review is not to be an attempted rehearing of appeal in disguise [see Thungabhadra Industries Ltd. v. Government of Andra Pradesh [ AIR 1964 SC 1372 ], Lily Thomas v. Union of India [ 2000 (6) SCC 224 ], and Anantha Reddy N. v. Anshu Kathuria [2013(15) SCC 534]]. Further, an error that is not self-evident and has to be detected by a process of reasoning can hardly be said to be an error apparent on face of the record justifying the court to exercise its power of review [see Parison Devi v. Sumitri Devi [ 1997 (8) SCC 715 ].

Hence, in the absence of any error apparent on the face of the record, we are not inclined to invoke the review jurisdiction in this case.

Resultantly, this review petition is dismissed.

Sd/-