High Court Kerala High Court

K.Nanu vs C.H.Kunhikrishna Kurup on 13 August, 2010

Kerala High Court
K.Nanu vs C.H.Kunhikrishna Kurup on 13 August, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP.No. 697 of 2010(U)


1. K.NANU, S/O. KANNAN, AGED 59 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. C.H.KUNHIKRISHNA KURUP, S/O. KANARAKURUP
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTIONS,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR

 Dated :13/08/2010

 O R D E R
                           C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
                    --------------------------------------------
                           R.P. NO.697 OF 2010
                                        IN
                       W.P.(C).NO.19161 OF 2010
                    --------------------------------------------

                  Dated this the 13th day of August, 2010

                                    ORDER

The second respondent in the above captioned Writ Petition has

filed this Review Petition to review the judgment dated 6.7.2010 in W.P.

(C).NO.19161/2010 and to dismiss the said Writ Petition. As per the said

judgment, this Court directed the first respondent to consider Ext.P1

appeal preferred by the petitioner in the Writ Petition with notice to the

writ petitioner and also the second respondent/review petitioner herein.

2. This review petition has been filed contending that subsequent

to the disposal of the Writ Petition, this Court passed an interim order in

R.S.A.No.759/2010. The said order is produced herein as Annexure-A..

Paragraph 3 of Annexure-A order would make it clear that the judgment

dated 6.7.2010 was brought to the notice of this Court while passing the

said order. It is made clear therein that the said order would not preclude

the DPI from taking any decisions on Ext.P1 appeal in accordance with

law and in terms of the order issued by this Court in W.P.(C).

NO.19161/2010. That apart, the review petition did not make out any

R.P. NO.697/2010
in W.P.(C).19161/2010 2

error that is apparent on the face of the records warranting interference

under the review jurisdiction. Evidently, the attempt on the part of the

review petitioner is to get the judgment re-written. There is no merit in the

review petition and accordingly, it is dismissed.




                                  (C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)

spc

R.P. NO.697/2010
in W.P.(C).19161/2010    3


                            C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.




                            W.P.(C). NO. /2010

                            JUDGMENT

                              June, 2010