IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 24TH AUGUST 2007 / 2ND BHADRA 1929 RP.No. 806 of 2007() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.1638/2006 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS: ------------------------------ 1. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT OFFICER, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, DISTRICT OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. A.DIVAKARAN, S/O.ARUCHAMY, THENAMPATHY, OZHALAPATH.PO, PALAKKAD. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, PALAKKAD. 3. RAGOTHAMAN, HIGH SCHOOL ASSISTANT(MATHS) TAMIL MEDIUM, GOVERNMENT HIGH SCHOOL, KOZHI[ARA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/08/2007,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & ANTONY DOMINIC, JJ. -------------------------------- R.P.NO.806 OF 2007 IN W.A.NO.1638 OF 2006 -------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of August, 2007 O R D E R Antony Dominic,J. This petition is filed seeking review of the judgment in the above writ appeal. According to the Public Service Commission, while implementing the judgment in the writ appeal, it is not the 3rd respondent, who is going to be affected, but it is yet another person, who is not a party in the writ petition or writ appeal and therefore, the judgment should be reviewed. 2. We have considered this matter. This was not a contention that was raised either in the writ petition or in the writ appeal. However, we clarify that the judgment of this Court has only laid down the principle, that is to be followed by the Public Service Commission in working out reservation and it is for the Public Service Commission to apply the principle laid down in the judgment. In the process, if any individual's right is likely to be affected, it is for the review petitioner -2- R.P.NO.806/2007 to issue notice to such person and consider his objections and thereafter take appropriate action in the matter. Clarifying the judgment as above, review petition is closed. P.R.RAMAN, Judge. ANTONY DOMINIC Judge. kcv. -3- R.P.NO.806/2007