IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 7TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 16TH KARTHIKA 1930 RP.No. 1175 of 2008() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.20989/2008 Dated 11/07/2008 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS IN WPC ---------------------------------------- 1. INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM RANGE, OFFICE OF THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, NANDAVANAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, OFFICE OF THE CITY POLICE COMMISSIONER, VAZHUTHAKKAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SUDHA DEVI RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER IN WPC -------------------------------- R.RAJU, S/O.RAJAYYAN, PANAKKAMURI VEEDU, KEEZHKOLLA, AMARAVILA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (POLICE CONSTABLE T.2184) DISTRICT ARMED RESERVE POLICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- R.P.1175/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 7th day of November, 2008 ORDER Challenging Ext.P1 order of punishment (wrongly noted as 'order of suspension' in the judgment), Ext.P2 appeal had been preferred before the first respondent, and by judgment dated 11.7.2008, I had directed the disposal of the said appeal. 2. It now turns out that the Government has passed Annexre-A order refusing to review the order of punishment. The writ petition was disposed of at the stage of admission. In the circumstances, direction to the first respondent to consider Ext.P2 in the writ petition requires to be reviewed. 3. I heard learned counsel who appeared for the writ petitioner also. 4. In the result, review petition is allowed. Judgment R.P.1175/2008 2 dated 11.7.2008 is set aside and the writ petition No.20989/2008 is dismissed. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs