IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 15TH JULY 2010 / 24TH ASHADHA 1932 RP.No. 642 of 2010(N) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.6339/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- YUSUF RAWTHER, S/O.NOOR MOHAMMED RAWHTER, POKKUNNY, VADAVANNUR VILLAGE, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.H.BADARUDDIN SMT.SHAMEERA B. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP.BY ITS SECRETARY PIN-695001 2. DEPUTY COLLECTOR AND CHIEF REVENUE OFFICER, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY NO.4, AUTHORISED OFFICE, KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, PALAKKAD PIN-6781001 4. THE DIRECTOR, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-PIN-695001. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BIJOY CHANDRAN SRI.POOVAPPALLY M.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FOR R1 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` R. P. No. 642 OF 2010 in W.P.(C) No. 6339 of 2010 N ``````````````````````````````````````````````````````` Dated this the 15th day of July, 2010 O R D E R This review petition has been filed by the writ petitioner, referring to the alleged submission stated as made from the part of the learned counsel for the first respondent Bank, but omitted to be incorporated in the judgment; which is seriously disputed by the learned counsel appearing for the first respondent Bank, asserting that no such submission was ever made by the said counsel and, therefore, it rightly does not find a place in the judgment passed by this Court on 02-06-2010. The learned counsel for the first respondent submits that there is no error apparent on the face of the records and that he wants to file an affidavit in detail, in response to the uncharitable submissions made from the part of the petitioner. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the statement has been made on a wrong and misconceived idea and RP.642/2010 : 2 : that the petitioner would like to withdraw the review petition, for which permission is sought for. Permission is granted. The review petition is dismissed as withdrawn. (P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE) aks