IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.Q.BARKATH ALI MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 RP.No. 168 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.1411/2009 Dated 05/10/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): APPELLANTS -------------------------------- 1. ANNIE, W/O.ANTONY, PULLENTHARA HOUSE, PANANGAD. 2. BINU ANTHONY(VINU), S/O.ANTONY,PULLENTHARA HOUSE, PANANGAD. 3. SINU GEORGE, S/O.ANTONY,PULLENTHARA HOUSE, PANANGAD. 4. LINU, S/O.ANTONY,PULLENTHARA HOUSE, PANANGAD. BY ADV. SRI.ASOK M.CHERIAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. N.S.MAKKAR, KALLATHARA VEEDU, KUMBALAM VILLAGE, KANAYANNUR TALUK. 2. PONNAN @ JOSEPH, CHIRAKKAL,PANANGAD. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESETNED BY ITS SECREATARY,DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERANAKULAM. 5. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI. 6. KUMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KUMBALAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.L.G.SURESH BABU THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No.168 OF 2010 IN W.A.NO.1411 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of February, 2010 ORDER Basheer, J. This review petition is at the instance of the appellants in the writ appeal. It is contended that subsequent to the disposal of the writ appeal, the Revenue Divisional Officer has issued Annexure A6 notice to comply with the directions issued by this court in W.P.(C) No.36235/2007 which was the subject matter of the writ appeal. 2. Learned counsel submits that the said notice issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer will cause irreparable loss and hardship to the review petitioners. We are afraid the above contention is wholly misconceived and untenable, to say the least. The scope and ambit of review is well delineated. The writ appeal was dismissed as withdrawn reserving liberty to the appellants to pursue the other statutory remedies, if any, before the statutory authorities. It is too late in the day for the petitioners to come up before this court seeking the aid of review jurisdiction and try to reopen the entire matter. RP.No.168/2010 2 3. We do not find any ground to review the judgment especially since the appeal was withdrawn when it came up for admission. The Review Petition is dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE P.Q.BARKATH ALI, JUDGE sv. RP.No.168/2010 2