IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2010 / 28TH ASWINA 1932 RP.No. 148 of 2007(E) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN CRP.123/2006 Dated 26/10/2006 APPL.7/2004 of UNTY.APPELLATE TRIBUNAL,TVM. .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER: -------------------------------------------- P.P. JAGEER, SELECTION GRADE LECTURER, DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH, S.N.M.COLLEGE, MALIANKARA, MOOTHAKUNNAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------ THE MANAGER, S.N.M.COLLEGE, MALIANKARA, MOOTHAKUNNAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.K.B.GANGESH FOR R1 SRI.ANIL GEORGE SRI.V.A.PRADEEP KUMAR SMT.SMITHA CHATHANARAMBATH FOR R1 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N. KRISHNAN & K.T. SANKARAN, JJ. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P. No. 148 OF 2007 IN C.R.P. No. 123 OF 2006 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 20th day of October, 2010. O R D E R Krishnan, J. This review petition is preferred to review the order in C.R.P.123/06. The review petitioner was a teacher by profession and he was warned by the Management for the laches he had made. He was a teacher for the 5th Semester students in B.A. Vocation course. As a part of the curriculum they were expected to be taught 'Othello', a Shakespearian Drama but what was taught was 'Macbeth' another Shakespearian tragedy. When the students appeared for the examination to their utter dismay they were in an embarrassing situation and that had resulted in these proceedings. The University Appellate R.P. No. 148 OF 2007 IN C.R.P. No. 123 OF 2006 -:2:- Tribunal held that the punishment inflicted, if it can be so called, does not come within the realm of S.63(6) of the University Act and therefore held that it has no jurisdiction. But on persuasion he had dealt with the matter on merits as well. Thereafter the matter has come up before this Court and the Division Bench after fully understanding the implications and the arguments advanced by learned senior counsel had answered the points raised. It was necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case to have dealt with the matter in detail so as to ensure a finality to the litigation. It is dissatisfied with the same this review petition is filed. 2. After hearing the learned senior counsel we are convinced that there are no R.P. No. 148 OF 2007 IN C.R.P. No. 123 OF 2006 -:3:- errors apparent on the face of the records or any other sufficient reason to review the judgment already rendered. Therefore this R.P. is dismissed. M.N. KRISHNAN, JUDGE. K.T. SANKARAN, JUDGE. ul/-