IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH THURSDAY, THE 18TH JUNE 2009 / 28TH JYAISHTA 1931 RP.No. 720 of 2008(M) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.36243/2004 Dated 10/10/2006 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C0 ------------------------------------------------------------- CORPORAL VIJAYAKUMAR, SERVICE NO.698173R R, AF/FIT, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.LATE NAIB SUBEDAR C.K.VELAYUDHAN NAIR, PUNCHAYIL HOUSE,MEVELLOOR P.O, VELLOOR VILLAGE, VAIKOM TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA STATE, PIN CODE:686 609. BY SRI.CORPORAL VIJAYAKUMAR-PARTY IN PERSON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS DEFENCE SECRETARY, SOUTH BLOCK, DEFENCE HEAD QUARTERS, NEW DELHI-110011. 2. THE CHIEF OF AIR STAFF, VAYU BHAVAN, AIR HEAD QUARTERS, NEW DELHI-110011. 3. AIR COMMODORE M.K.MARATHE, THE THEN AIR OFFICER COMMANDING, 11 BRD AF, NASHIK, MAHARASHTRA STATE. 4. AIR COMMODORE PRATAP SINGH, THE THEN AIR OFFICER COMMANDING, 11 BRD AF, NASHIK, MAHARASHTRA STATE. 5. GROUP; CAPTAIN P.P.S.KEHLON, THE THEN COMMANDING OFFICER, 24 WING AF, C/O 56 APO. 6. WING COMMANDER M.P.S.GILL, THE THEN COMMANDING OFFICER, 31 SQUADRON AF, C/O. 56 APO. 7. THE CHIEF CONTROLLER OF DEFENCE ACCOUNTS (PENSIONS), THE OFFICE OF THE CCDA (P), ALLAHABAD, U.P.STATE. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR FOR R1 TO 3 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH, J. ---------------------------------------------- R.P.No.720/2008 in W.P.(C) No.36243/2004 ---------------------------------------------- Dated 18th June, 2009. O R D E R The review petition is at the instance of the writ petitioner. The writ petition was filed aggrieved by the victimization in service. The writ petition was disposed of as per the judgment dated 10.10.2006 directing the respondents to grant disability pension to the petitioner for 40% disability with effect from the date of discharge. It was however made clear in the judgment that it will be open to the respondents to subject the petitioner to review and decide the further course and eligibility of the disability pension. It is submitted that the petitioner was subjected to a re-assessment. In the re-assessment, the petitioner has come to know that the respondents have come out with an altogether new version of the disability which is neither existent in the petitioner nor even heard in the medical science. According to the petitioner, he is again being harassed for the only reason of fighting for justice. I am afraid, these aspects cannot be gone into within the limited jurisdiction of a review petition. If the petitioner has any such grievance, necessarily, the R.P.No.720/2008 in W.P.(C) No.36243/2004 2 same will have to be pursued in appropriate original proceedings, not in a review petition. Therefore, without prejudice to the liberty to the petitioner to initiate appropriate original proceedings incorporating also the subsequent developments after the judgment dated 10.10.2006, this review petition is closed. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. tgs KURIAN JOSEPH, J ---------------------------------------------- R.P.No.720/2008 in W.P.(C) No.36243/2004 ---------------------------------------------- O R D E R Dated 18th June, 2009.