IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 8TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 19TH MAGHA 1932 RP.No. 83 of 2011() ------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.20680/2009 Dated 02/12/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. MAHATHMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 2. VICE CHANCELLOR, MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY, KOTTAYAM. 3. SYNDICATE OF MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY REPRESENTED BY THE VICE CHANCELLOR THE CHAIRMAN OF THE SYNDICATE, M.G.UNIVERSITY KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI. T.A. SHAJI, SC, M.G.UNIVERSITY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- P.V.ANIL KUMAR, LECLTURER, SCHOOL OF TECHNOLOGY & APPLIED SCIENCE MAHATMA GANDHI UNIVERSITY PRIYADARSINI HILLS PO KOTTAYAM 686 560. Shri N.DHARMADAN (Sr.) Shri O.V.RADHAKRISHNAN (Sr.) THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ R.P.No.83/2011 in W.P.(C). No.20680/2009-D ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 8th day of February, 2011 O R D E R This Review Petition is filed by the respondents in the writ petition. 2. Heard the learned Senior Counsel for the review petitioners Shri O.V.Radhakrishnan. It is submitted that many of the legal points raised in the Review Petition could not be brought to the attention of this Court. In the grounds of the Review Petition, the petitioners have relied upon various Judgments of the Apex Court and also the principles under Article 14 of the Constitution of India. 3. The matter was considered in detail in the Writ Petition. All the points argued on either side have been considered. It is well settled that the contentions in the review petition on the reasoning adopted in the Judgment cannot be a ground for review and the only remedy is to file an appeal. Evidently, the Review Petition can be entertained only if the R.P. No.83/2011 -:2:- Court is satisfied that there is an apparent error in the Judgment. What is sought for is a rehearing which is impermissible. There is no apparent error, and hence it is not entertainable. Leaving open the remedy of the petitioners to file an appeal, if they so choose, the Review Petition is dismissed. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE