IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 20TH DECEMBER 2010 / 29TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 RP.No. 342 of 1997(E) ------------------------------ [THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.NO.9493/1988 DATED 19/10/1992] .................... PETITIONER/PETITIONER: -------------------------------------- N.P. WILSON, NECHIKATTIL HOUSE, PAZHOOR EAST, PIRAVAM, (TEACHER ST. PHILOMINA'S HIGH SCHOOL, KOONAMMAVU). BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, CIVIL STATION, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ALWAYE. 3. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. 4. ARCHDIOCESE OF VERAPOLY, (CORPORATE EDUCATIONAL AGENCY, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, COCHIN -18. BY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C.M.P. No.30162 of 1997 & R.P. No.342 of 1997 in O.P. No.9493 of 1988 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of December, 2010 O R D E R The petitioner in the original petition seeks review of the following judgment dated 19.10.1992 passed in the original petition, with a petition to condone the delay of 1692 days in filing the review petition. “The main grievance of the petitioner is against the refusal to disburse salary due to him. There is also a case relating to non- approval of the appointment. 2. When the matter came up for hearing today, Government Pleader made available a communication from Director of Public Instructions, which says that - “Deputy Director of Education, Ernakulam in his first cited letter No.B2-46482/88 dated 19.4.1989 has reported that the arrears due to N.P. Wilson had already been withdrawn and paid to him and no other claims are due to him and as such his grievance stands redressed.” 3. Of course, salary can be paid only after approval. From this it will be clear that the petitioner's grievance mentioned in the Original Petition has been re-dressed. If there is any subsisting grievance, petitioner is free to make representation before the appropriate authorities. Original Petition is disposed of recording the above communication of the Deputy Director of Education.” C.M.P. No.30162 of 1997 & R.P. No.342 of 1997 in O.P. No.9493 of 1988 -2- I am of opinion that since for 13 long years the petitioner has not done anything in this review petition, no purpose would be served by considering the review petition and petition to condone the delay at this point of time. In any event, the petitioner has not satisfactorily explained the long delay of more than 4½ years in filing the review petition. Accordingly the C.M.P. and R.P. are dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN JUDGE shg/-