IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 RP.No. 375 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.19236/1997 Dated 02/02/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS IN THE OP: --------------------------------------------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER, HR & CE (ADMN) DEPARTMENT, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, HR & CE (ADMN) DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION, KOZHIKODE. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.K.C.SANTHOSH KUMAR RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS IN THE OP: ------------------------------------------------ 1. AGNI SHARMAN NAMBOODHIRI, S/O. DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI, PADINJATTIRI MANA, P.O. KALLARMANGALAM, KADAMPUZHA. 2. K.P. DAMODARAN NAMBOODIRI, S/O. NARAYANAN NAMBOODIRI, PADINJATTIRI MANA, P.O. KALLARMANGALAM, KADAMPUZHA, MALAPPURAM. BY SR.ADV.SRI.S.V.BALAKRISHNA IYER THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & ANTONY DOMINIC ,JJ. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No.375 of 2008 in O.P. No.19236 of 1997 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 15th October, 2008 ORDER Pius C.Kuriakose,J. Heard the learned Government Pleader. He drew our attention to Section 57 of the H.R. & C.E.Act and submitted that if at all the writ petitioner is having a genuine grievance against Exts.P1 and P7, he will have to prefer an appeal to the Commissioner under Section 61. The learned Government Pleader however conceded that if the decision of the Commissioner considering an appeal under Section 61 comes to be against the petitioner, he may have a remedy before the civil court. We find that Ext.P7 is a Government Order. That being so, we do not find any infirmity in having relegated the writ petitioner to remedies before the civil court. The Review Petition will stand dismissed. However, it is made clear that the directions in the judgment sought to be reviewed will be confined to the facts of this case and will not be a precedent. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE srd