IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH MARCH 2011 / 9TH CHAITHRA 1933 RP.No. 198 of 2011(P) --------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 21/01/2011 IN WPC.NO.544/2011 ...... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 IN THE WRIT PETITION: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M.VIJAYAKUMAR, S/O MANI, RESIDING AT KURAVANCODE VEEDU, KOLPADAM, THENKARA P.O., PALAKKAD-678 761. 2. K.RAJAN, S/O KRISHNAN, RESIDING AT KURAVANCODE VEEDU, KOLPADAM, THENKARA P.O., PALAKKAD-678 761. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN, SRI.ALAN PAPALI, SRI.GILBERET GEORGE CORREYA, SMT. DHANYA P.ASHOKAN, SMT. ANITHA MATHAI MUTHIRENTHI, SMT. O.V. BINDU. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS 1 TO 3 & 1ST RESPONDENT IN THE WPC: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. M.MOHAMMED ALI, RESIDING AT MANGADAN HOUSE, PALLASSERY, P.O.MANNARKKAD,PALAKKAD-678 582. 2. M.JAYAPRAKASAN, RESIDING AT MALAPPURAM HOUSE, MEZHUKUMPARA, THENKARA P.O.,PALAKKAD-678 761. 3. M.ANIL, RESIDING AT KUNDUKARATHODY, ETHIRPANAM, MANNARKKAD P.O.,PALAKKAD-678 562. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD-678 582. R4 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V.T.K.MOHANAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Kss R.BASANT & K. SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------------ R.P NO: 198 OF 2011 in W.P(C) 544 of 2011 ----------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th March, 2011. O R D E R Basant, J. Heard. The judgment dated 21-1-2011 is sought to be reviewed by the petitioners who are respondents 2 and 3 in the writ petition on the ground that on account of reasons beyond their control their counsel could not appear and advance his arguments before the Court before the judgment dated 21-1-2011 was pronounced. The learned counsel for the petitioners in the writ petition takes a gracious stand and submits that he has no objection against the review petition being allowed but only subject to the conditions that the directions in the judgment sought to be reviewed must continue as an interim order till the writ petition is disposed of afresh on merits. 2. To us that appears to be a very gracious and correct stand. We are satisfied that the review petition can be allowed subject to appropriate conditions. 3. In the result; a) This review petition is allowed. RP 198/2011 2 b) The judgment dated 21-1-2011 is recalled. c) But it is directed that the directions in the judgment dated 21-1-2011 shall continue to remain in force as an interim direction till fresh disposal of WPC 544/2011. R.BASANT Judge K. SURENDRA MOHAN Judge jj RP 198/2011 3