IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2009 / 13TH MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 58 of 2009(I) -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.300/2009 DATED 05/01/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER -------------------------------- MUSTHAFA, AGED 27, S/O.ABDURAHMAN, PANAYAMTHODIKA, MAMPAD P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.SUDHEESH KUMAR SRI.SUNIL KUMAR A.G RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM CHAIRMAN, THE RIVER MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, MALAPPURAM. 3. MAMPAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 4. THE SECRETARY, MAMPAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 5. THE COMMITTEE, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, MAMPAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SMT.SUDHADEVI, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- R.P.No.58 of 2009 in W.P.(C.) No.300 of 2009 --------------------------------- Dated, this the 2nd day of February, 2009 O R D E R The writ petition was dismissed as withdrawn by judgment dated 05/01/2009. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that it was on account of a mistaken impression that the writ petition was sought to be withdrawn, and that as a result of the dismissal of the case, grave prejudice has been caused to the writ petitioner. 3. Taking into account the fact that it was on account of a mistake that the writ petition happened to be dismissed as withdrawn, the review petition is allowed, and the judgment is recalled. Post the writ petition for admission. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg