Read Time: 05 minutes
Through the order in question, a cost of Rs 25,000 had also been imposed on the petitioner
The Madras High Court recently observed that a review petition cannot be entertained as an appeal in disguise. "The jurisdiction of this court in review is in a narrow compass and can be exercised only upon an error apparent on the face of the record," said the court.
The bench of Chief Justice Sanjay V Gangapurwala and Justice Bharatha Chakravarthy was dealing with a review applicant filed against the order passed by a co-ordinate bench of the high court in April this year upholding the conversion of a college into a mosque situated near a temple.
The main writ petition was filed by the present applicant for removal of the construction put up by one Rabbaniya Arabic College. He alleged that a lodge, which was functioning at Barracks Road, Perambur, Chennai, was being used for the past four years as an Arabic college in the name of Rabbaniya but later on, attempts were made to convert the Arabic college into a mosque and prayers were also being offered there.
In the main petition, the petitioner had alleged that a pucca construction was going on without obtaining proper approval from the Chennai Corporation and despite receipt of his representation against the same, no action had been taken so far. He claimed that riots may occur if the college is used as a mosque.
However, a co-ordinate bench had dismissed the main petition with Rs 25,000 costs while stating that the apprehension of the petitioner was unfounded and when there existed immense religious harmony in diversity in this land, it did not find any substance in the apprehension of the petitioner.
In the review petition, the counsel for the applicant submitted that Subbaiah Mutt Sivan Temple is situated near the place in question, and if Arabic College is converted into a mosque, there will be public nuisance.
However, the high court noted that under the order sought to be reviewed, the division bench had considered the locus of the applicant along with the fact of religious harmony in India and no new grounds were set up in review.
Therefore, while noting that jurisdiction of the high court in review can be exercised only upon an error apparent on the face of the record and there was none present in the matter at hand, court dismissed the review application.
Case Title: K.Gopinath v. The District Collector, Rajaji Salai, Chennai and Others
Please Login or Register
