IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 10TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 19TH BHADRA 1931 RP.No. 693 of 2009() -------------------- C.M. APPLN. No.1/2009 & W.A. 5/2009 OF THIS COURT. REVIEW PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS: ---------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, AGRICULTURAL DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER KASARGOD. 4. THE ACCOUNTANT GENERAL (A&E) KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. R. LAKSHMI NARAYAN. RESPONDENT: --------------- S.SUSHAMA, AGRICULTURAL OFFICER KRISHI BHAVAN, MOGRAL PUTHUR,KASARGOD. BY ADV. SRI. T. SETHUMADHAVAN. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = == == = = = C.M.APPLN. NO.104/2009 & R.P. NO. 693 /2009 IN W.A. 5/2009 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 10TH DAY OF September, 2009. O R D E R Raman, J. Heard. Delay in filing this Review Petition is condoned. C.M. Application No. 104/2009 stands allowed. 2. The writ appeal was filed belatedly and hence an application for condonation of the delay of 865 days was filed supported by an affidavit. After hearing the parties, this Court did not find good reasons for condonation of the delay. Accordingly, the delay petition was dismissed. Consequently, the appeal was also dismissed. True, in the judgment, incidentally a reference is made to a decision of this Court in State of Kerala v. Thomas Oommen (2003(1) KLT 7) to justify the decision of the learned single Judge that the date of effective advice is the date for reckoning seniority. Since the delay was not condoned, whatever that is stated regarding the merits of the contentions by itself R.P. 693/2009 2 is no good ground for review. Since the review is not a re-hearing of the matter and even otherwise when the delay is not condoned, resultantly appeal is not entertained. So no grounds made out for review. Dismissed. P.R. RAMAN, (JUDGE) P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) KNC/-