Sumith vs The Village Officer on 22 July, 2008

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

RP.No. 696 of 2008(I)


1. SUMITH, S/O. S.V. MOHAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE TAHSILDAR, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,

3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,

4. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE

                For Petitioner  :SRI.V.G.ARUN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :22/07/2008

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J

   -------------------------------------------------------------
                         R.P.No.696/2008
   --------------------------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 22nd    day of July, 2008

                           O R D E R

Counsel submits that, it is on account of a mistake of

fact that the counsel made the submission that the writ

petition had become infructuous and on that ground, the

review is sought for.

From the statement made, I am satisfied that the

grievance of the writ petitioner highlighted in the writ

petition is still surviving. Therefore, it is obviously a

mistake on the part of the counsel in submitting that the

writ petition had become infructuous. In view of this

apparent mistake the review is allowed and the judgment is

recalled.

Writ Petition shall be posted for hearing.

ANTONY DOMINIC
JUDGE

2

vi.