IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2011 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1932 RP.No. 180 of 2011(U) --------------------- (JUDGMENT DATED 28.1.2011 IN WP(C) NO.28008 OF 2009 OF THE HON'BLE COURT) ---------------- REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER --------------------------------------------------- KADAKKAL EDUCATIONAL TRUST, 'AMINAS', TC 12/1050, JAI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING TRUSTEE, MOHAMMED RASHEED, AGED 55 YEARS, 'AMINAS', TC 12/1050. BY ADV. SRI.G.S.REGHUNATH RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS ---------------------------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, FINANCE, CENTRAL SECRETARIAT, NEW DELHI-1. 2. THE CHIEF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, 'AAYAKAR' BHAVAN, KOWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 003. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: VK C.K.ABDUL REHIM, J --------------------------------------- R.P.No.180 of 2011 in W.P(C) No.28008 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2011. O R D E R In the judgment dtd.28.1.2011, on the basis of the contentions of the respondents, this Court observed that Ext.P10 application, which was pending before the 3rd respondent, stands closed as “application withdrawn”, noted in the 12A Register. Therefore while disposing the writ petition this Court had given liberty to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy, by applying for registration under Section 12A, with respect to the periods prior to the assessment year 2010-11. 2. In the review petition it is stated that the respondents are taking a stand that Ext.P10 application was not disposed of as provided under Section 12(AA)(b)(ii) and therefore a fresh application is not maintainable. However, it is not necessary to render any decision regarding maintainability of a fresh application. I am of the view that R.P.No.180 of 2011 2 interest of justice will be served if a modification is made in the directions, contained in the judgment dtd.28.1.2011, to the extent of permitting the petitioner either to file fresh application for registration under Section 12A or to seek appropriate remedy to restore Ext.P10, if permissible under law. The Review Petition is disposed of with the above said modifications to the directions contained in the judgment dtd.28.1.2011. C.K.ABDUL REHIM JUDGE ab