IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN MONDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2009 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1930 RP.No. 126 of 2009(D) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.34/2006 DATED 25/07/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS: --------------------------------------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, HOME AFFAIRS, NEW DELHI. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL DEFENCE SECURITY CORPS(DSC), ADJUTANT GENERAL BOARD, ARMY HEAD QUARTERS WEST BLOCK III, R.K.PURAM, NEW DELHI. 3. THE OFFICER-IN-CHARGE OF RECORDS DEFENCE SECURITY CORPS (DSC), KANNUR. 4. THE CHIEF RECORDS OFFICER DEFENCE SECURITY CORPS (DSC) MIL ROAD, KANNUR. BY ADV. MR.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SG. RESPONDENT/PETITIONER: --------------------------------------- M.A. KESAVAN, SUB CLERK (RETIRED) DEFENCE SECURITY CORPS, RESIDING AT MAKKAL HOUSE, MANATHALA, CHANAKKAD, TRICHUR DISTRICT. BY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: rs. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ---------------------------------------------- R.P. No.126 of 2009 in W.P.(C)No.34 of 2006 --------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2009. J U D G M E N T Heard Sri.P.Parameswaran, the learned Assistant Solicitor General of India appearing for the review petitioners and Sri.M.C.Nambiar, the learned counsel appearing for the respondent. 2. In this review petition the respondents in W.P(C)No.34 of 2006 seek a review of the judgment delivered by me on 25.7.2008 in the said writ petition. I had by judgment delivered on 25.7.2008 allowed W.P(C)No.34 of 2006 and directed the review petitioners to promote the writ petitioner (the respondent herein) as Subedar Major (Clerk) with effect from 4.11.1992. When the writ petition was heard, as noticed by me in para 4 of the judgment there was no appearance for the respondents in the writ petition (the petitioners in this review petition). I had also noticed that the respondents had not filed a counter affidavit though more than two years had passed after the writ petition was filed. The review petitioners state that a counter affidavit had been prepared, duly executed on 6.3.2007 and forwarded to the Additional Central Government Standing Counsel appearing for the respondents in the writ petition along with a letter dated 15.3.2007. Copies of the letter dated 15.3.2007 and the counter R.P.No.126 of 2009-D 2 affidavit forwarded along with that letter are produced along with the review petition as Annexure A1 and A2 respectively. On going through the review petition and after hearing the learned counsel appearing on either side, I am satisfied that the review petitioners have to be afforded an opportunity to contest the writ petition on the merits. I accordingly review the judgment delivered by me on 25.7.2008 in W.P(C)No.34 of 2006. Registry to post the writ petition for hearing as per roster. P.N.RAVINDRAN JUDGE ab