IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOMAS P.JOSEPH MONDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2009 / 29TH POUSHA 1930 RP.No. 10 of 2009() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.2231/2008 Dated 03/12/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER: ---------------------- SRI.S.RAJKUMAR KAMMATH THE CORPORATE MANAGER OFFICE OF THE CORPORATE MANAGER T.D. SCHOOLS ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SMT.R.RANJINI RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION THE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION ALAPPUZHA. 2. THE DISTRICT EDUCATIONAL OFFICER ALAPPUZHA. 3. P.RAMESH BABU PADMAGIRI NIVAS,A.N.PURAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY G.P.SRI. S.U. NAZAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: A.K.BASHEER & THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.NO.10 OF 2009 in W.A.No.2231 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 19th day of January, 2009 O R D E R Basheer, J: Petitioner seeks review of the judgment contending interalia that even if he approaches the revisional authority as indicated in the judgment, the contentions that may be raised by him are not likely to be considered in their proper perspective, in view of certain observations made therein. 2. We fail to understand as to why the revisional authority will not consider the revision petition on its merit and in accordance with law. We make it clear that it will be open to the revisional authority to dispose of the revision petition, uninfluenced and untrammelled by any of the observations made in the judgment, which were of course only a “prima facie expression of opinion,” as indicated in the judgment itself. 2 R.P.NO.10/2009 The review petition is disposed of in the above terms. (A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE) (THOMAS P. JOSEPH, JUDGE) cl