IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2007 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1929 RP.No. 399 of 2007(C) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.32998/2004 Dated 14/11/2006 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS: ------------------------------------------ 1. THE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. THE VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE REGISTRAR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHINI HILLS, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER: ----------------------- SMT.LAILA T. ABRAHAM, ASSISTANT LIBRARIAN GRADE II, UNVERSITY LIBRARY, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, PRIYADARSHIN HILLS, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE ABRAHAM THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/11/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ======================= R.P. No.399 of 2007 in W.P.(C) No. 32998 of 2004 ======================= Dated this the 14th day of November, 2007 ORDER This review petition is filed by Mahatma Gandhi University and its Officers who are the respondents in the writ petition. I disposed of the writ petition on the basis of the amended ordinance, relied on by the petitioner. In the review petition, it is pointed out that the amended provision has not yet come into force for want of assent from the Chancellor. In answer to the same the learned counsel for the petitioner in the writ petition, without disputing the statement of the University, submits that subsequently annexure R1(a) order was passed by the University, to the benefits of which the petitioner is entitled to. In the above circumstances, I am satisfied that my judgment is liable to be reviewed and I recall the judgment dated 14.11.06 in W.P.(C) No.32998/2004, allowing the review petition. Sd/- S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE jp