IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2010 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1932 RP.No. 387 of 2010(C) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.8825/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 6 IN THE WPC: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE TAXES (A) DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT SECRETRIAT, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM. 2. THE EXCISE COMMISSIONER, COMMISSIONERATE OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANATHAPURAM. 3. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, PALAKKAD. 4. THE EXCISE INSPECTOR, EXCISE RANGE OFFICE, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD. 5. THE CI OF EXICSE, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. SASIDHARAN, S/O.AYYAPPAN, KIZHAKKEKARA, ERATTUKULANGARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. SHIJU, S/O.SUBRAMANIAN, POYYA ANNATHU HOUSE, KODUNGALLUR, THRISSUR DISTRICT. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.ANTONY MUKATH THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ R.P.No.387 OF 2010 IN W.P.(C) NO. 8825 OF 2010 (C) ===================== Dated this the 17th day of May, 2010 O R D E R Irrespective of the merits of the contentions raised by the learned Government Pleader, it is pointed out by the counsel for the writ petitioners that based on the interim order, licence has been issued after confirmation by the Commissioner of Excise. 2. In view of this, I do not think it necessary to review the order as sought for. Therefore, the review petition is closed without prejudice to the contentions. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp