IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH JULY 2011 / 6TH SRAVANA 1933 RP.No. 445 of 2011(V) --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.22779/2010 Dated 21/07/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ---------------------------------------------- P.VINU, S/O. PACHAN, AGED 52 YEARS, RESIDING AT POOCHEDIVILA VEEDU, TC NO.12/447, PLAMOODU, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.AHZAR RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------- 1. CHAIRMAN, KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT COMMITTEE, KERALA LABOUR WELFARE FUND BOARD BUILDING, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-35. 2. KERALA HEADLOAD WORKERS WELFARE BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN, KERALA LABOUR WELFARE FUND BOARD BUILDING, VANCHIYOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 035. BY ADV. SRI.KOSHY GEORGE, SC. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: svs R.P. NO.445/2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE A:COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21/07/2010 IN WPC.NO.22779/2010. RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: NIL /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE. svs K.SURENDRA MOHAN, J. ------------------------------------------- R.P.No.445 of 2011 in WPC NO.22779 of 2010 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 28th July, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioner seeks a review of the judgment dated 21.7.2010 dismissing WPC No.2279 of 2010 in this Review Petition. 2. As per the judgment sought to be reviewed, the writ petition filed by the petitioner challenging an order passed by the Appellate Authority under the Kerala Headload Workers Act, 1978 confirming the cancellation of the petitioner's registration as a Headload Worker, was under challenge. The allegation against the petitioner was that he along with another worker by name Prasannan had forced their entry into the premises of an establishment by name GMA Associates and had threatened the employees who were present there. An enquiry was conducted into the incident by the Junior Superintendent in the office of the Kerala Headload workers Welfare Board. Sri.Prasannan admitted guilt, but the petitioner contested the proceedings. R.P.No.445 of 2011 2 Therefore, on the basis of the report of the enquiry, the registration of the petitioner as a Head load worker was cancelled. The petitioner challenged the cancellation of his registration in WPC No.5496 of 2010. The same was disposed of by this Court, relegating the petitioner to his appellate remedy under the Kerala Head load Workers Act. Accordingly, he filed a statutory appeal which was disposed of by Ext.P15 order dated 10.5.2010, the order that was under challenge in the writ petition. 3. After an elaborate hearing of both the petitioner as well as the counsel for the second respondent, the writ petition was dismissed, holding that no grounds had been made out by the petitioner to justify an interference with the impugned order. 4. The judgment is dated 21.7.2010. According to the averments of the petitioner in this Review Petition, a certified copy of the judgment was received by him on 23.10.2010. However, this Review Petition is filed only on 21.6.2011, about eight months thereafter. No satisfactory explanation is available for justifying the long delay. Therefore, I do not find any grounds to condone the delay R.P.No.445 of 2011 3 in filing this review petition. Consequently, the petitioner is guilty of laches and negligence in instituting these proceedings. 5. In spite of the above, the petitioner was heard at length. He has not been able to point out any error apparent on the face of record so as to justify a review of the judgment dated 21.7.2010. The counsel for the petitioner has only been reiterating the very same contentions that were raised in the writ petition. I notice that all the said contentions have been considered and found against in the judgment that is sought to be reviewed. I do not find any reason to review the judgment. This review petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. sd/- K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE true copy P.S.TO JUDGE css/ R.P.No.445 of 2011 4