IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 6TH OCTOBER 2009 / 14TH ASWINA 1931 WA.No. 2161 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENTIN WPC.26384/2007 Dated 10/06/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ P.K.RAMACHANDRAN, S/O.PADMANABHAN NAIR, MUNDAYIL HOUSE, PO.CHEMBRASSERI, PANDIKKAD, MALAPPURAM DIST. WORKING AS HEAD CLERK, O/O.SUPDT.OF SURVEY & LAND REVENUE, NILAMBUR. (NOW WORKING AS UPPER DIVISION CLERK,O/O.GOVT.PLEADER & PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,DIST.COURT MANJERI,MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.SAMSUDIN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE DIRECTOR OF VIGILANCE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE JOINT SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, VIGILANCE DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. BENNY GERVASIS. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. --------------------------------------------- W.A. NO. 2161 OF 2009 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of October, 2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph, J. The appellant is the petitioner in the Writ Petition. The petitioner challenged Exts.P7 and P9 orders passed by the Vigilance Tribunal and the Government respectively. The issue pertains to the proceedings initiated against the petitioner by the Vigilance Department on the recommendation of the Tribunal and as per Ext.P9, the Government passed an order reducing the rank of the petitioner for a period of three years. The learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition, mainly holding that this Court under Article 226 of the Constitution of India will not be justified in interfering with the findings of fact. It was also observed that merely for the reason that another view also is possible, exercise of jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is not warranted. 2. When the appeal came up before us, it was pointed out that the appellant/petitioner has a remedy of review, as provided under Rule 35 of the Kerala Civil Services (Classification, Control and Appeal )Rules. Learned counsel for the appellant, on instruction, submits that the W.A.NO. 2161/2009 2 appellant had in fact pursued the said remedy and the review petition was dismissed on 30.5.2009. That order is not under challenge. Being a statutory review, that order has become final and unless that order is challenged, the appellant/petitioner will not get any effective relief, even if he is entitled to any relief. Faced with such circumstances, learned counsel for the appellant seeks permission to withdraw the Writ Petition with liberty to file a proper petition, incorporating all the pleadings. Though ordinarily, at the appellate stage we may not permit withdrawal of a petition, in view of the mistake of fact referred to above, we feel that in the interest of justice, liberty should be given to the appellant/petitioner to withdraw the Writ Petition. Accordingly, we set aside the judgment of the learned Single Judge and dismiss the Writ Petition and the Writ Appeal with liberty to the appellant/petitioner to file a fresh petition, incorporating all the pleadings. (KURIAN JOSEPH) JUDGE (C.T. RAVIKUMAR) JUDGE sp/ W.A.NO. 2161/2009 3 KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ. W.A. NO.2161/2009 JUDGMENT 6th October, 2009