IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 31ST JULY 2008 / 9TH SRAVANA 1930 RP.No. 759 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.6251/2008 Dated 22/02/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 IN THE WP:- ----------------------------------------------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR (RR), KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM, KOCHI -17. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. JOJO JOSEPH, S/O JOSEPH, PARECATTIL HOUSE, KIDANGOOR P.O., ANGAMALY, (VIA), ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. THE CHIEF MANAGER, KERALA FINANCIAL CORPORATION, BRANCH OFFICE, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ----------------------------------------------------------- R.P.No.759/2008 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of July, 2008 O R D E R By the judgment in the writ petition, it was held that the petitioner therein cannot be saddled with the liability of collection charges due under the Revenue Recovery Act, since no amount was recovered utilizing the machinery under the Act. It is seeking review of the aforesaid judgment, respondents 2 and 3 in the writ petition have filed this review petition. An identical review petition was considered and dismissed by this court by order dated 21st July, 2008 in RP.No.717/2008. There, as in this case, in view of the fact that, no amount was recovered by the revenue recovery proceedings, it was held that there was no error in the judgment warranting review. The reasoning in the aforesaid order fully applies to this case also . Therefore, I do not find any merit in the review petition. Review petition fails and is dismissed. vi ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE 2