IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 5TH JUNE 2008 / 15TH JYAISHTA 1930 RP.No. 495 of 2008(Y) --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.5459/2007 Dated 15/11/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/1ST RESPONDENT: --------------------------- STATE OF KERALA REP.BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P. SANTHOSH KUMAR. RESPONDENTS/ PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 2&3: ------------------ 1. AKHILENDIA NADAR ASSOCATION (ANA) (PREVIOUS NAME HINDU NADAR CORPORATION) REG.NO.214/1987 REP.BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY N.K.BHASY,CENTRAL OFFICE,MUKKALA,MULLOOR P.O, VIA VIZHINJAM - 695521,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REP.BY THE SECRETARY,PATTOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. RT.REV.DR.J.W.GLADSTONE,AGED 59, S/O. REV.WILSON,PRESIDENT,S.I.U.C (SOUTH INDIA UNITED CHURCH FOR SHORT)BISHOP HOUSE,L.M.S. COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 05/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JJ. ------------------------------------------ Review Petition No. 495 OF 2008 IN W.P.(C) No. 5459 OF 2007 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of June, 2008. O R D E R P.R.Raman, J. As per the order dated 15.11.2007, certain directions were issued by this Court to Chief Secretary to furnish the materials called for by the Backward Commission within a period of one month. It was specifically observed in that order that request for further extension of time would not be entertained. The State had sought for further extension of time by filing a petition. Various reasons are stated as to why such extension of time is required to be given. That request could not be allowed by this Court because of the above observation that such extension application would not be entertained. Hence this review. 2. Heard. In the factual situation, this Court only meant that requests for further extension of time will not be ordinarily R.P.No.495/08 2 entertained. Hence, we clarify accordingly that there will not be any impediment in seeking extension of time on sufficient grounds. This review petition is disposed of accordingly. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. smp