IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH JANUARY 2010 / 30TH POUSHA 1931 RP.No. 1251 of 2009(W) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.6824/2009 Dated 17/09/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS --------------------------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF EXCISE, EXCISE DIVISION OFFICE, KASARAGOD. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.V.MANU RESPONDENT(S): WRIT PETITIONERS ------------------------------- 1. GOPACHANDRAN NAIR, ONATTU HOUSE, PERIYAPURAM P.O., PAMPAKUDA VIA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. GEORGE KOCHUPARAMBIL ALLIAS, ANISH KOCHUPARAMBIL HOUSE, VAZHITHALA P.O., THODUPUZHA. BY ADV.SRI.RAJU JOSEPH THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- R.P.No.1251 OF 2009 IN W.P(C).6824 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of January, 2010 O R D E R This review petition is filed on the premise that Ext.P1 Government Order relied on while issuing the judgment sought to be reviewed is a wrong order. That is an order passed by the Board of Revenue on 16.10.1992. The Commissioner of Excise and another who are the review petitioners states that they intend to approach the Government to get Ext.P1 order set aside. It is true that in the counter affidavit to the writ petition contentions against Ext.P1 order were apparently placed. But that does not turn away the binding nature of Ext.P1 as long as it stands. Obviously therefore, there is no error apparent on the face of record of the judgment sought to be reviewed. The review petition is hence dismissed. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.23/01.