MANJU NAG Vs. C E S C LTD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The opposite party is present through his Counsel. But nobody appears for the petitioner despite repeated calls. Learned Counsel for the opposite party submits that the case was disposed of by order dated 2.4.1998 wherein direction was passed by this Commission sending the disputed meter to the CEI for adjudication. Subsequently, the petitioner has filed the petition for revival of this case. We find that this Commission is not vested with power to review its own order. Moreover, the order is just and proper requiring no interference. The petition is rejected. Petition dismissed.