IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 2ND JUNE 2009 / 12TH JYAISHTA 1931 RP.No. 429 of 2009(A) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.6044/2009 Dated 11/03/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): 2ND RESPONDENT ------------------------------------ THE SECRETARY, CHENGANNUR MUNICIPALITY, CHENGANNUR. BY ADV. SRI.S.HARIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): WRIT PETITIONER/RESPONDENT IN THE WP --------------------------------------------------- 1. NADESAN, THARATHUVELI, THUMPOLI, ALAPPUZHA, RETIRED MOSQUITO WORKER, CHENGANNUR MUNICIPALITY, CHENGANNUR. 2. DIRECTOR FOR URBAN AFFAIRS, GOVT. OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.A.J.VARGHESE THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ R.P.No.429/2009 in W.P.(C). No.6044/2009-A ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 2nd day of June, 2009 J U D G M E N T In this review petition filed by the Municipality, it is pointed out that the direction in the judgment to the effect that the first respondent should sanction various benefits to the petitioner is not correct since the petitioner was only a contingent employee in the Municipality. It is pointed out that the entire terminal benefits has to be disbursed by the Municipality itself and no sanction from the Director of Urban Affairs is required. In that view of the matter, the operative portion of the judgment is modified to the following effect:- 2. There will be a direction to the second respondent, namely, Secretary, Municipality to sanction and disburse the various benefits to the petitioner within one month from today. The review petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms