IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 13TH AUGUST 2009 / 22ND SRAVANA 1931 RP.No. 453 of 2009(U) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.4586/2009 Dated 12/02/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENT NO.6 ------------------------------------- C.G.OOMMEN, S/O.GEORGE, CHAVANICKAMANNIL HOUSE, PERUMANOOR P.O., KOCHI - 15. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KURIAN SRI.MATHEW B. KURIAN SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5 -------------------------------------------- 1. P.M.JALAJA, W/O.LATE BALAKRISHNAN, CHANIYAMURI HOUSE, SUDHARMA ROAD, THEVARA, KOCHI. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ELAMKULAM VILLAGE OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. 5. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOCHI, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI - 11. 6. COCHIN PORT TRUST, REP. BY ITS DEPUTY CONSERVATOR, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI. B.S. KRISHNAN (SR) SRI. A.X. VARGHESE SRI. RAMESH BABU GOVT. PLEADER SRI. DILEEP MOHOAN. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/08/2009, A/W. W.P.C.NO. 4586/09 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= R.P. No. 453 of 2009 and W. P (C) No. 4586 of 2009 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 13th August, 2009. J U D G M E N T The 6th respondent in the writ petition is the petitioner in the review petition. He seeks review of my judgment dated 12-2-2009 in the writ petition. 2. The writ petition was disposed of at the time of admission itself, accepting the averments in the writ petition. The proceedings challenged in the writ petition were proceedings under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act and Rules. The averment in the writ petition was that the proceedings impugned in that writ petition were passed without giving the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. Prima facie accepting that averment as true, I disposed of the writ petition with a direction that the impugned proceedings shall be treated as show cause notices and the petitioner shall be given an opportunity to file objections. Thereafter, the 2nd respondent was to consider the objections of the petitioner and pass a reasoned order as contemplated under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. 3. The petitioner in the review petition now points out that much before the writ petition was filed, Ext. R1(a) notice was issued to the petitioner in the writ petition for a hearing on 12-1-2009 in which hearing, the petitioner in the writ petition participated and that the petitioner had suppressed that fact in the writ petition for which reason the judgment is liable to be reviewed. 4. A counter affidavit has been filed by the petitioner in the writ petition, in which it is admitted that the petitioner in the writ petition had received Ext. R1(a) notice and also participated in the hearing on 12-1-2009. Her only contention is that due to a bona fide omission R.P.453/09 & W.P(C).No. 4586/09. -: 2 :- on the part of the petitioner in the writ petition, the same was not produced before this Court . She has absolutely no explanation as to why the fact that the petitioner in the writ petition was heard on 12-1- 2009 on the subject was not mentioned in the writ petition. I rendered the judgment accepting the averment that the petitioner in the writ petition was not afforded an opportunity of being heard, which now turns out to be false. I am satisfied that there is suppression of material fact for which alone the writ petition is liable to be dismissed. Even otherwise, since the petitioner in the writ petition was actually heard in the matter, against the orders to be passed, the petitioner can avail of statutory remedies. Accordingly, I allow the review petition, recall my judgment dated 12-2-2009 and dismiss the writ petition. Since the petitioner in the writ petition had approached this Court suppressing material facts, the petitioner shall pay costs of Rs. 2500/- payable to the Kerala Mediation Center. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge.