IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
RP.No. 654 of 2008(P)
1. SHEEJA THOMAS, THAKADEYELIPARAMBIL
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY, REGIONAL TTRANSPORT
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SRI.G.PRABHAKARAN
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :12/08/2008
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------------
R.P. 654/2008 IN W.P.(C) 11910 of 2008
--------------------------------------------------------
Dated: AUGUST 12, 2008
ORDER
The writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated
11th June, 2008, recording the submission of the learned
Government Pleader that following Ext.P3, the RTA
considered the matter on 7.2.2008 and that despite the
direction requiring the petitioner to produce the current
records, petitioner had not produced the same.
Producing Annexures A1 to A7 this review petition is filed
by the petitioner contending that the submission made on
behalf of the respondent was factually incorrect.
2. Today, on instructions, though the learned
Government Pleader tells me that none of those
communications was received by the respondent, factually I
am not satisfied that the said submission is correct. This is
for the reason that Annexures A6 and A7 are none other
R.P. 654/2008 IN W.P.(C) 11910 of 2008
2
than the communications issued by the respondent itself,
both of which make reference to Annexure A2. Evidently,
therefore, Ext.A2 has been received and Exts.A6 and A7
acknowledge the same.
3. If that be so, the submission, on the basis of
which the writ petition was disposed of, is factually
incorrect and for that reason the judgment is vitiated by an
error apparent on the face of the record. I am satisfied that
the review petition deserves to be allowed.
Review petition is allowed and the judgment is
accordingly recalled.
ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE
mt/-