IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH AUGUST 2011 / 25TH SRAVANA 1933 RP.No. 608 of 2011(G) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.15269/2010 Dated 15/07/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ---------------------------------------------- C.M.M.HANEEFA,KUNNUMPURATH SHEEJA NIVAS, KUTTICHAL PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.AHAMMED SRI.M.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REP.BY THE SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPUAM. 695 001. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. ADV. SRI. BIJOY CHANDRAN - GOVT. PLEADER. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------------- R.P.No.608 OF 2011 in W.P.(C)No.15269 of 2010 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of August, 2011 ORDER The petitioner seeks review of my order dated 15.7.2011, wherein I vacated the interim order. The petitioner submits that the interim order was vacated because the counsel for the petitioner was absent. He has stated that the counsel could not appear because of circumstances beyond his control. 2. I have heard both sides. I vacated the interim order not simply because the counsel for the petitioner was absent. On 7.7.2011 when the matter came up, I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and I was not inclined to extend the stay and the stay was not extended on that day. Of course, on 15.7.2011, when the matter was again taken up, the learned counsel for the petitioner was absent. But, that was not the reason to vacate the interim order. In fact, on 15.7.2011 there was no interim order to be vacated at all because the stay was not extended, after 8.4.2011 and I only confirmed the fact that there is no stay after R.P.No.608/11 2 8.4.2011. In the above circumstances, I do not find any ground to review my order 15.7.2011. Accordingly, the review petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd R.P.No.608/11 3