IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 15TH JANUARY 2009 / 25TH POUSHA 1930 RP.No. 1402 of 2008(C) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.30480/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): PETITIONER ---------------------- SHEELA VINCENT, D/O.D.LIVINGSTON, TC.4/2169 ROHINI, PTP JN., KURUNGANOOR MARAPPALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.MANOJ RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, (LAND ACQUISITION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.LAKSHMI RANI THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - R.P.No.1402 of 2008 in W.P.(c).No. 30480 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 15th day of January , 2009 ORDER Smt.Marina Joseph seeks for time on behalf of Sri.Manoj.R.Nair. I am not inclined to grant time since I find that the grounds raised in this review petition cannot be entertained at all. The writ petition was filed seeking a direction to the land acquisition officer to refer the question of determination of the correct compensation payable for the acquired properties of the petitioner on the assertion of the petitioner that he petitioner had submitted application for reference on 18/01/2007 pursuant to Ext.P1 award notice. Accepting that case prima facie, I directed the government pleader to seek instructions from the land acquisition officer as to whether application for reference has been received from the petitioner and if so, whether the same was submitted on time. On 30/10/2008, the government pleader submitted that an application for reference was received from the petitioner. The government pleader was therefore directed to seek specific instructions RP.No.1402/08 2 as to when exactly the application was received. Pursuant to that order, the government pleader submitted on the basis of written instructions that the petitioner submitted his application for reference only on 23/01/2008 which was beyond the period of limitation prescribed by law. In view of that submission only, the writ petition was dismissed. Now, in this review petition, the ground urged by the petitioner is that he has submitted application for reference by registered post on 13/02/2007 and that if the date of knowledge of the award is taken as the starting point of limitation, the said application will be within time. The petitioner has also offered to produce documentary evidence to substantiate the above ground. Obviously, the ground now raised is in sharp conflict with the petitioner's own admissions and assertions in the writ petition. It is not possible to entertain this ground having regard to the contours of this court's powers of review under Order XLVII Rule 1. The Review Petition will stand dismissed. It is made clear that other remedies if any available to the petitioner are not foreclosed. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. RP.No.1402/08 2