The Telangana High Court has dismissed a review petition filed by the Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (HMWSSB) against an earlier order on a compassionate appointment claim, holding that review jurisdiction cannot be used as a substitute for an appeal or to introduce new grounds not raised during the original proceedings.
Justice Surepalli Nanda, while hearing the review petition along with a contempt case alleging non-compliance with the court’s earlier directions, expressed dissatisfaction with the Water Board’s conduct, observing that it had acted contrary to the spirit of the previous order.
The dispute arose from a writ petition filed by Hyderabad resident P Kavitha seeking compassionate appointment. In April 2025, the High Court had issued directions in her favour, following which the Water Board sought a review of the judgment. Appearing for the HMWSSB, the Advocate General argued that the writ petition had been filed after considerable delay and that the petitioner, being a married daughter whose brother was employed as a police constable, was ineligible for compassionate appointment.
Counsel for the petitioner contended that these grounds had never been raised during the original hearing and therefore could not be introduced for the first time in review proceedings.
Accepting the submission, Justice Nanda held that a review petition is confined to correcting an apparent error on the face of the record and cannot be used to reopen a case or advance fresh arguments. Finding no such error, the court dismissed the review petition and directed the HMWSSB to reconsider the petitioner’s claim after granting her a personal hearing.