IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 30TH JANUARY 2009 / 10TH MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 1 of 2009() ------------------ AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.20727/2004 Dated 26/11/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY CHEIF SECRETARY GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GOVT.SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY REP. BY SECRETARY,IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT GOVT.SECRETARIAT,,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TRICHUR. 4. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, DIVISION III, NEYYATTINKARA. 5. THE ADMINISTRATOR, COMMAND AREA DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY TRICHUR-20. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.VIPINDAS. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- M.DAISY, W/O.RAJAYYAN, R.D.BHAVAN THAZHAMVILA VEEDU, VATTAVILA P.O.,VIA AMARAVILA. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- R.P.1/2009 in W.P.(C) No.20727/04 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 30th January, 2009. O R D E R This is a petition to review the judgment dated 26.11.2008 in W.P.(C) No.20727/04. Taking note of the fact that the writ petitioner had served the Government for around 21 years and she had become ineligible for joining any other service, this court directed the Government to consider her case, at least for ex-gratia pension. There was no counter affidavit also in the writ petition, despite granting sufficient time. 2. Learned Government Pleader submits that there are no permanent posts in the Command Area Development Authority and that all the posts are filled up by deputation. But the hard and distressing fact remains that for more than around 21 years the writ petitioner had served the Authority and it was in such circumstances only, this court felt it just, reasonable and equitable to issue such a direction. Learned Government Pleader further points out that the judgment may not be treated as a precedent. I make it clear that only in the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, such a direction was issued and the same cannot be laid RP NO.1/09 2 down as a principle of law, as such to be followed in any other case. Subject to the above clarification, the Review Petition is disposed of. It is made also clear that since there is delay owing to the pendency of the Review Petition, the judgment shall be complied with within two months from today, and if not, the officers responsible for the delay will be personally liable for interest at the rate of 12%. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------------- R.P.1/2009 in W.P.(C) No.20727/04 ---------------------------------------------- O R D E R Dated 30th January, 2009.