IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.PADMANABHAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2007 / 23RD ASWINA 1929 RP.No. 978 of 2007(I) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.14362/2007 Dated 16/08/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1, 2 & 4 ------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LA), FOR COCHIN REFINERY LIMITED, VYTTILA, THRIPPUNITHURA. 3. THE LAND REVENUE COMMISSIONER, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.D.ANIL KUMAR. RESPONDENTS: PETITIONERS & 3RD RESPONDENT ----------------- 1. K.K.OMANAKUTTAN, KAIPADAPARAMBIL VEEDU, PERINGARAKAZHA, HMT COLONY POST, KALAMASSERY. 2. K.K.RAVEENDRAN NAIR, KASIPADAPARAMBIL VEEDU, PERINGARAKAZHA, HMT COLONY POST, KALAMASSERY. 3. KERALA INFRASTRUCTURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, KINFRA HOUSE, ELANKAM LANE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR. BY THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------- R.P.No.978 of 2007 in W.P.(C) No.14362 of 2007 ------------------------------- Dated this the 15th October, 2007. O R D E R Heard. Admitted. Advocate Sri.M.Rajasekharan Nair takes notice for respondents 1 and 2. Advocate Sri.G.S.Reghunath appears for the 3rd respondent. 2. The grounds stated in the review petition is that though the case records were in the possession of one Government Pleader, but the case was argued by another Government Pleader. It was also averred that without hearing and perusing the records, relying on the statement made by another Government Pleader, this Court pronounced the judgment. I do not propose to probe into the truth or otherwise of that allegation. Since the contention of the State is that the judgment was pronounced without hearing the concerned Government Pleader, but some other Government Pleader, the judgment passed by me in W.P.(C) 14362/2007, dated, 16.8.2007, is reviewed and recalled. Post the writ petition for hearing. RP.No.978/2007 2 It is made clear that the interim order passed in the writ petition shall stand revived and extended until the disposal of the writ petition. K.PADMANABHAN NAIR, JUDGE nj.