IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 8TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 17TH KARTHIKA 1932 WA.No. 1870 of 2010() --------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER IN RP.165/2009 Dated 16/09/2009 AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.37803/2008 Dated 19/12/2008 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER IN R.P./PETITIONER IN WP(C) ------------------------------------------------------------- R.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI, HEAD SURVEYOR, RE-SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT OFFICE, THIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.V.THAMBAN SRI.R.REJI SMT.THARA THAMBAN SRI.B.BIPIN SMT.REVATHY P.NAIR RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS IN R.P./RESPONDENTS IN WP(C) ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, THULASI HILLS, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF SURVEY & LAND RECORDS SURVEY DIRECTORATE, VAZHUTHAKKADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 & R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS R2 BY STANDING COUNSEL SRI.ALEXANDER THOMAS THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & P.R.Ramachandra Menon, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A. No.1870 of 2010 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 8th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT Ramachandra Menon, J. The appellant who was the writ petitioner approached this Court with the following prayers: “(i) Issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or order calling records. (ii) issue a writ in the nature of certiorari or any other writ or order declaring that the petitioner is entitled to revaluation of answer sheets in the subject “Boundary disputes and allied Matters” , Part of head surveyors. (iii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction directing the 2nd respondent to produce the answer sheet of the petitioner in the subject “Boundary disputes and allied Matters”, of the head surveyors test Part B. (iv) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction directing the respondents to revalue the answer sheet of the petitioner in “Boundary disputes and allied Matters”, of the head surveyors test Part B by a panel of experts that may be called from the 3rd respondent and appointed by this Hon'ble Court.” W.A.No.1870 of 2010 - 2 - 2. The main grievance as projected in the writ petition appears that by virtue of the decision already taken by the Public Service Commission to effect the revaluation of the concerned answer papers, as borne by Ext.P5 judgment, the appellant also intended to obtain similar benefit to have the answer paper revalued in respect of the concerned Departmental Examination; which accordingly was sought for and the prayer was granted by the learned Single Judge, in terms of Ext.P5. Subsequently, finding that the concerned paper which was sought to be revalued happened to be mentioned wrongly in the writ petition, a review petition was filed seeking to effect the requisite change in the relief portion, referring to the concerned paper. The Public Service Commission filed counter affidavit pointing out that there was clear suppression of material facts, in so far as the writ petitioner had not appeared for the Head Surveyor's Test and the actual paper which was sought to be revalued was in respect of Paper I of First Grade Surveyor's Test. It was also brought to the notice of the Court that W.A.No.1870 of 2010 - 3 - the writ petitioner had earlier applied for 'rechecking' of the answer paper and after rechecking, the Commission had found that there was no change in the marks obtained by him and it was duly communicated. 3. After hearing both the sides, the learned Single Judge observed that there was suppression of material facts from the part of the review petitioner and accordingly, the judgment was recalled and the writ petition was dismissed. So also, the review petition was dismissed with costs of `25000/- which is sought to be intercepted in this writ appeal. 4. Going by the materials on record, particularly the pleadings and also the submissions made by the learned counsel for the appellant, the appellant/writ petitioner was never benefited because of the relif sought for and obtained with reference to the paper as given in the writ petition. It is stated that the appellant was under the bona fide impression that the decision taken by the Public Service Commission to have the answer papers revalued was equally W.A.No.1870 of 2010 - 4 - applicable to the case of the appellant as well; more so in view of the fact that a reference has been made in Exts.P3 and P4 to the Firstk, Grade Surveyor's Test as well as Head Surveyor's Test simultaneously. The learned counsel submits that the appellant/writ petitioner happened to seek for the benefit of Ext.P5 in such circumstances and on realising the mistake as to the concerned paper, review petition was filed. Learned counsel further submits that the appellant was in no manner benefited because of the mistake committed, which in turn was sought to be corrected by filing the review petition. 5. After hearing both the sides, we find that there was some confusion, atleast in the mind of the writ petitioner/appellant, who cannot be held benefited in any manner because of the prayer sought for and extended to him with reference to Ext.P5. In the said circumstances, we find that the imposition of costs on the review petitioner/appellant is not warranted. Accordingly, we delete the same; while sustaining the judgment of the learned Single Judge W.A.No.1870 of 2010 - 5 - in the writ petition as well as in the review petition, dismissing both. Writ appeal is disposed of as above. J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon, Judge vns