IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 7TH DECEMBER 2009 / 16TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 RP.No. 202 of 2009(G) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.17075/2007 Dated 01/12/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENT -------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (FFP.B) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SMT. M.R SREELATHA RESPONDENT/PETITIONER ------------------------- K. PRABHAKARAN, PULIYAMPALLIL HOUSE, MANAKKODAM, THIRUMALA BHAGOM, P.O. THURAVOOR, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.K.K.SATHEESH THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: T.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- R.P No.202 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.17075 of 2007 -------------------------- Dated this the 7th December,2009 O R D E R Heard learned Government Pleader for the review petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the writ petitioner. The Review petition is filed pointing out that the amendment in respect of the scheme namely Kerala Freedom Fighters' Pension Scheme especially clause 23 therein could not be brought to the notice of the Court when the writ petition was heard. It is contended that going by the amendment, application/review/appeal petitions received after 31.3.1994 will be considered only on production of official records such as warrant of arrest, jail records etc clearly showing the applicants sufferings in connection with the freedom struggle. In the judgment, it was held that Circular relied upon by the review petitioners cannot affect the rights of the parties. It cannot go against the specific stipulations of the scheme. The directions issued in Ext.P7 judgment binds the review R.P No.202 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.17075 of 2007 2 petitioners. 2. Learned counsel for the writ petitioner, by relying upon Annexures R3 and R4 produced along with the counter affidavit in the review petition, points out that even after the implementation of the amended scheme they have been granting pension in respect of other similarly placed freedom fighters who could not make available the primary evidence in the matter. Annexure-R3 is the order dated 18.4.2008 issued by the District Collector, Alappuzha granting pension to one Sri.P.K.Vijayan and Annexure-R4 is the order passed in respect of Sri. N. Sukumaran,. 3. The note file leading to the said orders is produced as Annexure R2. On a perusal of Ext.R2, it is seen that in those cases also copies of the original records were absent. The reports of the Tahsildar have been relied upon in their cases. 4. Therefore, it is up to the review petitioners to consider the claim of the writ petitioner and pass appropriate orders. There is no apparent error in the R.P No.202 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.17075 of 2007 3 judgment and review petitioners did not rely upon the amendment at the time when the writ petition was heard. Therefore, the claim of the petitioner will be considered on merits and appropriate orders will be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order. Review petition is dismissed but with the above observations. T.R RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE ma R.P No.202 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.17075 of 2007 4 R.P No.202 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.17075 of 2007 5