IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 12TH JUNE 2009 / 22ND JYAISHTA 1931 RP.No. 486 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN WPC.6692/2009 Dated 18/03/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS --------------------------------- 1. DIRECTOR GENERAL, CENTRAL INDUSTRIAL SECURITY FORCE, CISF HEAD QUARATERS,BLOCK NO.13, C.G.O.COMPLEX,LODHI ROAD,NEW DELHI-110 003. 2. UNION OF INDIA,REP.BY THE SECRETARY TO THE MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS,NEW DELHI. BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASST.SOLICITOR RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- G.PAUL RAJU,CONSTABLE NO.001980015, S/O.JEEVA RATNAM,AGED 33 YEARS,LDCE ROLL NO.4012, CISF UNIT,CIAC,KOCHI,KERALA 683111. BY ADV. SHRI B.N. SIVASHANKER THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No.486/2009 in W.P.(C) No.6692/2009 - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 12th day of June, 2009. O R D E R The review petition is filed at the instance of the respondents in the writ petition. They are aggrieved by the interim order passed by this court dated 18.3.2009 in the writ petition. This court allowed the writ petitioner to attend the training, pending further orders to be passed in the writ petition. 2. It is explained in the review petition that the petitioner is involved in Crime No.153/2004 involving offences under Section 498(A) read with Sections 3 and 4 of Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. It is therefore pointed out that if ultimately the writ petitioner is convicted, then the entire thing will be a waste. It is also pointed out that appropriate conditions should be imposed by this court to safeguard the interest of the department. 3. Having regard to the facts of the case, as the writ petitioner being a Constable, it cannot be said that the apprehension expressed by the review petitioners are totally unsustainable. But ultimately if the petitioner is acquitted, and if he is not allowed to complete the training now, he will lose rp 486/2009 2 a number of years of seniority also. In that view of the matter, and in the light of the readiness expressed by the learned counsel for the writ petitioner to abide by any conditions imposed by this Court, the petitioner, if ultimately convicted in the criminal case, will reimburse the expenses for the training. An undertaking to that effect will also be furnished by the petitioner before the appropriate authority. The review petition is disposed of as above. Issue photo copy today itself. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/