IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM THURSDAY, THE 1ST SEPTEMBER 2011 / 10TH BHADRA 1933 RP.No. 655 of 2011 IN WPC.21007/11 ------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.21007/2011 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): 4TH RESPONDENT ------------------------------------------------ CHELAKKAL ABOOBACKER, S/O.SULAIMANKUTTY, PADINJAREKKARA, POST PURATHUR, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER AND OTHER RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. CHEKKAL USMAN, S/O.SULAIMANKUTTY, PADINJAREKKARA, POST PURATHUR, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-685155. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, MALAPPURAM-676505. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, TIRUR POLICE STATION, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN-688051. 4. CHOKKANTAKATH KOYAMU, S/O.SUBAIR, CHOKKANTAKATH HOUSE, POST KUTTAYI, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-685051. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.JAIBY PAUL SRI.MOHAMMED IQUABAL C.M. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/09/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C. K. ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------------ R. P. No.655 of 2011 in W. P. C. No.21007 of 2011 ------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 1st day of September, 2011 ORDER Pius C. Kuriakose, J Review of our judgment dated 05/08/11 in W.P.C No.21007/11 is sought for by the 4th respondent in the Writ Petition on the ground that the continuance of our judgment will result in prejudice to the 4th respondent/review petitioner who was the Writ Petitioner in W.P.C.426/11. The submission of Sri.Jamsheed Hafiz, the learned counsel for the review petitioner was that under the judgment in W.P.C.426/11, the petitioner was granted police protection and the police are now declining protection saying that our judgment in W.P.C.21007/11 restrains the police from granting such protection. 2. We have gone through our judgment sought to be reviewed as well as copy of the judgment in W.P.C.426/11. R. P. No.655 of 2011 -2- We are not persuaded to accept the submission of Sri.Jamsheed Hafiz that our judgment will stand in the way of the police abiding by the directions issued in W.P.C.426/11. If it is the grievance of the petitioner that the directions contained in judgment in W.P.C.426/11 are not being obeyed, it is always open to the petitioner to invoke the contempt jurisdiction of this Court in respect of the judgment in W.P.C No.426/11. We dismiss this R.P in limine as no ground is made out for invoking the jurisdiction for review. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE JUDGE C. K. ABDUL REHIM JUDGE kns/-