A review petition cannot serve as a rehearing of the appeal and requires clear grounds for error, as affirmed by precedent.

….............................................................. R.P.No.212 of 2026 in W.A.No.27 of 2026 ….............................................................. Dated this the 24^th day of February, 2026 ORDER P.V. Balakrishnan , J.

This review petition is filed by the appellant in W.A.No.27 of

2026, seeking review of the judgment dated 12.01.2026, passed in it.

2. Heard Adv. Harish Gopinath, the learned counsel appearing for the review petitioner.

3. Writ Appeal No.27 of 2026 was disposed of on merits as per judgment dated 12.01.2026 after considering the materials on record and hearing both sides. The grounds raised in this review petition would show that what the review petitioner attempts is nothing but a rehearing of the appeal. It is a settled law, as held by the Apex Court in the decision in Lily Thomas v. Union of India [2000 (6) SCC 224] that a review is not to be an attempted rehearing of the appeal in disguise.

4. We do not find any error apparent on the face of the record warranting the review petition to be entertained.

Resultantly, this review petition is dismissed.

Sd/-