IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2008 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1930 RP.No. 414 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WA.1260/2006 Dated 12/12/2006 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/6TH RESPONDENT: ----------------- THE SECRETARY,CENTRAL COUNCIL OF INDIAN MEDICINE,INSTITUTIONAL AREA, JANAKPURI, NEW DELHI-58 BY ADV. SRI.V.JAYAPRADEEP RESPONDENTS/APPELLANTS: ------------- 1. NATIONAL INTEGRATED MEDICAL ASSOCIATION KASARAGOD DISTRICT BRANCH, KASARAGOD REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, DR.SREENIDHI SARALAYA, S/O.LATE SEETHARAMA SARALAYA, AGED 34 YEARS, NOW RESIDING AT SREENIDHI HOUSE, BADIYADUKKA P.O.,PERADALA, KASARAGOD DIST. 2. DR.SRRENIDHI SARALAYA SREENIDHI HOUSE, BADIYADUKKA P.O.,PERADALA, KASARAGOD DIST. 3. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, TRIVANDRUM. 4. THE CHIEF SECRETARY STATE OF KERALA, TRIVANDRUM 5. THE SECRETARY HEALTH & FAMILY WELFARE DEPARTMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 6. THE DRUGS CONTROLLER OF KERALA TRIVANDRUM. 7. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE KASARGOD. 8. DR.KHADER K.A., CHAIRMAN, ANTI-QUACKERY CELL, KASARAGOD DISTRICT AND INDIAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, KUNJATHUR KANJESHURE, KASARAGOD 9. DR. P. NAGRAJ,ANJALI, MATERNITY & NURSING HOME MAIN ROAD, BADAIKKA, PERDALA, KASARGOD. R3 TO R7 BY G.P. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. .................................................................... R.P. No.414 of 2008 in W.A. No.1260 of 2006 and C.M.A. No.178 of 2008 in R.P. No.414 of 2008 .................................................................... Dated this the 8th day of April, 2008. ORDER C.N.Ramachandran Nair, J. Review is filed by the respondent in the Writ Appeal and in the Writ Petition against judgment in the Writ Appeal after inordinate delay of over 400 days. The W.P. was filed by persons practising Indian Medicine against the order of the State Government prohibiting practice of allopathic medicine by them. Even though Single Bench as well as the Division Bench upheld the order of the State Government, the petitioners did not have complaint and they appear to have accepted the judgment. The review petitioner also did not file Writ Appeal against the Single Bench judgment. Without filing Writ Appeal against the Single Bench judgment, we do not think respondents can file review petition against the judgment of the Division Bench which has only confirmed Single Bench judgment. We do 2 not find any substance in the belated review petition. We, therefore, decline to condone the delay and consequently dismiss the delay petition and the review petition. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge pms