IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2011 / 30TH POUSHA 1932 RP.No. 24 of 2011(B) -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.36412/2010 Dated 15/12/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONERS IN WP(C): ------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE WOOD CRAFT ORGANISATION OF KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, T.P. RAJU, CRAFT N' STYLE MANKAV, KOZHIKODE - 673 007. 2. KERALA WOOD INDUSTRIAL OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, N.P. DASAN, DHARU FURNITURE, NALUPURAKKAL, CHENOLI.P.O, KOZHIKODE - 673 525. 3. N.P. RAMESAN, PRANAVAM, MADAKKARA, KANNOOKKARA.P.O, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE - 673 102. 4. P.K. SUBHASH, M/S.LAKSHMI WOOD WORKS, THODANNUR, VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE. BY ADVS. SRI.THAMPAN THOMAS, SRI.B.V.JOY SANKER. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014. 2. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS (SPECIAL AFFORESTATION) AND NODAL OFFICER, CONVENOR, STATE LEVEL COMMITTEE, KERALA, FOREST HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 014. 3. CENTRAL EMPOWERED COMMITTEE, REP. BY THE MEMBER SECRETARY, GATE NO.31, JAWAHARLAL NEHRU STADIUM, LODHI ROAD, NEW DELHI - 110 003. 4. DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, KOZHIKODE DIVISION, 6TH FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. R1,R2 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BENNY VARGHESE THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- R.P. No.24 of 2011 in W.P (C) No.36412 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated this the 20th January, 2011 O R D E R When the writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 15h December 2010, as far as the 4th petitioner is concerned, accepting the learned Government Pleader submission that he had not submitted any application for No Objection Certificate, no relief was granted to him. 2. In the review petition, petitioners have produced documents indicating that the application was in fact made and that the submission made to the above effect was incorrect. 3. On instructions, learned Government Pleader today has also confirmed that an application has been received from the 4th petitioner. Therefore, the judgment to the extent relief has been declined to the 4th petitioner needs to be reviewed and I do so. 4. In the light of the submissions thus made by the learned Government Pleader that the application of the 4th petitioner was also considered on 20.10.2010, I direct that R.P. No.24 of 2011 in W.P (C) No.36412 of 2010 2 as undertaken before this Court let an order be passed on the application of the 4th petitioner subject to confirmation of the Central Empowered Committee and that the same be communicated to the 4th petitioner within two months from today. It is directed that in the meanwhile, status quo as on today shall be maintained in so far as to the 4th petitioner in the writ petition also. With the aforesaid direction, the review petition is disposed of. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE ma /True copy/ P.A to Judge R.P. No.24 of 2011 in W.P (C) No.36412 of 2010 3