IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 14TH MARCH 2011 / 23RD PHALGUNA 1932 RP.No. 1 of 2011() ------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER DATED 10-8-2009 IN WA.1768/2009 ............... REVIEW PETITIONER / APPELLANT : ------------------------------------------------------- S. RAJEEV, NON VOCATIONAL TEACHER IN ENGLISH, GOVT. VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MALAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. RESPONDENTS / RESPONDENTS : ------------------------------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECREATARY TO GOVERNMENT, GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 3. THE PRINCIPAL, GOVERNMENT VOCATIONAL HIGHER SECONDARY SCHOOL, MALAYINKEEZHU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. JAIBY PAUL. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: Mn A.K. BASHEER & C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JJ. ------------------------------------------------------- C.M. Appln. No. 2 of 2011 & R.P. No.1 of 2011 in W.A.No. 1768 of 2009 ------------------------------------------------------------ Dated this the 14th day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT A.K. Basheer, J. The prayer in this application filed under Section 5 of the Limitation Act is to condone the delay of 385 days in filing this review petition. 2. Petitioner seeks review of the judgment dated July 28, 2009 in W.A. No. 1634/2009. According to the petitioner the delay occurred because of his “personal inconvenience and family crisis”. It is seen admitted by the petitioner that he received a certified copy of the judgment without any delay. But the petitioner has not divulged what was the “personal inconvenience and family crisis” that prevented him from filing this review petition. 3. We are not at all satisfied with the so called explanation offered by the petitioner to condone the inordinate delay. Therefore the delay petition is dismissed. Consequently, the review petition is also dismissed. A.K.BASHEER, JUDGE. C.T.RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE. rkc