IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1933 RP.No. 978 of 2009 -------------------- (AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WA.156/2009 Dated 27/01/2009 ) REVIEW PETITIONERS/ PETITIONERS/APPELLANTS -------------------------------------------- 1. KOCHU THRESSIA, W/O. GEORGE, AGED 63 YEARS, VILAYATHIL VEEDU, ANJUMOORTHY POST, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. 2. ALEX,S/O.JOSE, AGED 45 YEARS, KANACHAYI VEEDU, VAINTHALA, PALAYAMPARAMBU POST, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK. 3. ALEX,S/O. GEORGE AGED 42 YEARS, VILAYATHIL VEEDU, ANJUMOORTHY POST, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENTS/ RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS -------------------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF SHIPPING AND SURFACE TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, NEW DELHI. 2. THE ASSISTANT PROJECT DIRECTOR & MANAGER (TECH),NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA, PALAKKAD. 3. THE SPECIAL DEPUTY COLLECTOR, S.L.A.O. & COMPETENT AUTHORITY, NH 47, PALAKKAD. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA R2 AND R3 BY ADV. SRI.THOMAS ANTONY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag. CJ & P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. .............................................................................. REVIEW PETITION NO. 978 of 2009 ......................................................................... Dated this the 17th November, 2011 O R D E R MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag. CJ. The appellants/Review petitioners are before us by virtue of the liberty reserved to them in the Special Leave Petition by the Apex Court. The main contention of the appellant/review petitioners seems to be that at the time of final notification their objections were not taken into consideration before passing the notification. 2. When the matter came up for consideration before the learned Single Judge and also the Division Bench, as observed by the learned Single Judge as well as the Division Bench, a Court Commissioner was appointed for local inspection to verify whether the objection raised by the review petitioners was in fact correct and whether there was any option left for the respondent REVIEW PETITION NO. 978 of 2009 2 authorities to exclude the land of the review petitioners. As the very inspection by the Court Commissioner was at the instance of the review petitioners and when the report of the Commissioner was not palatable to the review petitioners, they turned back and said, their objections ought to have been considered by the authorities before issuing the notification. All these contentions were already considered by the Division Bench and as a matter of fact, there is no apparent error on the face of the record to review any portion of the order. Accordingly, the Review Petition is dismissed. MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk