IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.RAMKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2009 / 4TH ASHADHA 1931 RP.No. 280 of 2006(Y) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.36116/2005 Dated 03/01/2006 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS: PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 5 AND 6: ------------------------------------------------------ 1. MUHAMMED, M/S. Y.E.F. & Y.E.M. JUICE CORNER, DHARVESH COMPLE, UPPALA, KASARAGOD. 2. ABDULLA, OWNER OF SHOP 311, DHARVESH COMPLEX, UPPALA, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.D.KRISHNA PRASAD SRI.D.NARENDRANATH SRI.M.HARISHARMA SRI.T.P.ELDHOSE SMT.O.K.SANTHA RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 --------------- 1. ABDULLA, S/O. ABDUL KHADER, BADRIYA NAVY MEDICALS, DHARVESH COMPLEX, UPPALA, KASARAGOD. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY (HOME DEPARTMENT), SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KASARAGOD. 4. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUMBLA, KASARAGOD. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANJESHWARAM POLICE STATION. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.RAVEENDRA BABU THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: R. BASANT & V. RAMKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------------------- R.P.NO.280 OF 2006 in W.P.(c) No.36116 of 2005-Y ------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2009 ORDER Basant,J. The petitioners have come to this Court with the prayer that the judgment in W.P.(c) No.36116/05 dated 3/1/06 may be reviewed. By that judgment the Bench had only confirmed the earlier interim order passed on 23/12/05. That interim order reads as follows: “ Urgent notice to respondents 3 to 6 by special messenger. Government Pleader to get instructions from respondents 1 and 2. Post on 3/1/2006. Meanwhile the police is directed to keep law and order and consider Ext.P5 and if the allegations are correct, take appropriate action. Police R.P.NO.280 OF 2006 -: 2 :- is directed to see that life of the petitioner and his family members are not endangered.” The petitioners are respondents 5 and 6 in the writ petition. We have gone through Ext.P5. It is averred in Ext.P5 that there is a grievance that the life of the petitioner in the writ petition is threatened and that goondas are trying to obstruct him from the running of the shop in peace. 2. We have considered the nature of the prayer and the nature of the relief granted. We are not inclined to agree that the impugned order in any way deserves to be reviewed. The directions in the order dated 23/12/05 which has been confirmed later on 3/1/06 are all functions which the police must perform even without any specific directions of this Court. In these circumstances, this review petition is dismissed. Needless to say, if the said order were misused as apprehended by the petitioners, the option of the petitioners to seek redressal shall remain unfettered. We clarify that no civil dispute between the parties can be assumed to have been settled or decided in favour of respondents 5 and 6 by the said order. Such disputes, if any, R.P.NO.280 OF 2006 -: 3 :- will have to be resolved by appropriate proceedings before competent courts/authorities. 3. This R.P. is accordingly dismissed. Sd/- R. BASANT (Judge) Sd/- V. RAMKUMAR (Judge) Nan/ //true copy// P.S. to Judge R.P.NO.280 OF 2006 -: 4 :-