IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 27TH JULY 2010 / 5TH SRAVANA 1932 RP.No. 672 of 2010(H) ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.17114/2009 Dated 23/07/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS 2 TO 4 IN W.P.(C). ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, AGRICULTURE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETAIRAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER(ENFORCEMENT) KOLLAM. 3. AGRICULTURAL DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, VIKAS BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER AND 1ST RESPONDENT IN W.P.(C). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. R.PRASANNAN, SECRETARY, VANIJYA VYAVASAYA MASDOOR SANGH, B.M.S.S.OFFICE, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. KERALA KERAKARSHAKA SAHAKARANA FEDERATION LTD. NO.4370(KERAFED) ARISTO JUNCTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM -695014 REP.BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY ADV.MR.P.PRATHEESH ADV.MR.MOHAMMED SHIRAZ THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ R.P. No.672 of 2010 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 27th day of July 2010 O R D E R Writ Petition was disposed of by judgment dated 23.7.2009 directing the 3rd petitioner herein to pass orders on Ext.P6 representation. In this review petition, it is contended that neither the 3rd petitioner nor petitioners 1 and 2 are having any administrative control over the affairs of the 2nd respondent. On this basis, it is contended that they will not in a position to deal with the representation as directed in the judgment. 2. If as stated by the review petitioners, as they have no administrative control over the affairs of the Federation, they cannot be expected to deal with the representation made by the writ petitioner. Therefore, direction requiring the 3rd review petitioner to dispose of the representation is erroneous and for that reason, judgment will stand recalled. Review Petition is allowed as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE. Jvt