IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2007 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1929 RP.No. 1180 of 2007(P) ---------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.25132/2006 Dated 11/07/2007 ID.3/2003 of LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER --------------------------------------------- K.RASHEED, MANAGING DIRECTOR, SILVER FOAM PVT. LTD., MAVOOR ROAD, PATHIYARA P.O., CALICUT. BY ADV. SRI.D.SAJEEV SRI.K.R.HARIDAS RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LABOUR AND REHABILITATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SHERISTADAR, LABOUR COURT, KOLLAM. 3. THE GENERAL SECRETARY, SILVER FOAM WORKERS ASSOCIATION, RUSSELPURAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. A.J. VARGHESE. SRI. BLAZE K. JOSE. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ R.P.NO.1180 OF 2007 IN W.P.(C)No.25132 OF 2007 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of December, 2007 ORDER This review petition is filed for appropriate clarification of the judgment in the writ petition. In the judgment I had directed payment of costs of Rs.2,000/- (Rupees two thousand only) as a condition for setting aside the ex parte award, to the 3rd respondent Union, and produces proof of such payment. The contention of the petitioner is that the petitioner could not find out the 3rd respondent Union in so far as, as per his information that Union is defunct. The Labour Court also refused to permit the petitioner to deposit the costs in Court. It is under the above circumstances that the petitioner has filed this review petition seeking appropriate clarifications in the matter. 2. The counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent in the writ petition appears in the review petition also and submits that the counsel is prepared to accept the costs on behalf of the 3rd respondent Union. Accordingly, today the counsel for the R.P.No.1180/07 2 petitioner hands over the costs of Rs.2,000/- as ordered in Annexure-1 judgment to the counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent, who acknowledges receipt of the same. I direct the Labour Court, Kollam to treat the same as sufficient compliance with the direction in Annexure-1 judgment and to proceed with adjudication of the industrial dispute accordingly, as directed in the judgment. The review petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd R.P.No.1180/07 3