IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 22ND JULY 2010 / 31ST ASHADHA 1932 RP.No. 211 of 2010(M) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.26564/2009 Dated 30/11/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- KK. ABDUL RAFEEK, COMMERCIAL TAX PRACTITIONER(TRAINEE), KURUVAKKUNIL HOUSE, KARINGANAD, VALIYOUR P.O., PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 309 BY ADV. SRI.B.S.KRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.K.ANAND (A.201) SMT.LATHA KRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ANURAJ V.G., S/O. SRI. V..R. GOPAL, AGED 40NYERAS, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.10/1543-A, KASINATHAN LANE, SOUTH THAMARAPARAMBU, FORT KOCHI-682 001. 2. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT GOVT. SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE COMMISSOINER, COMMERCIAL TAX DEPARTMENT GOVT,. SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 4. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPUAM. ADV. SRI.O.V.RADHAKRISHNAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R1 SMT.K.RADHAMANI AMMA FOR R1 SRI.K.RAMACHANDRAN (THYKOODAM) FOR R1 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 22/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------------- RP.NO.211/2010 in W.P.(C) NO.26564/2009 --------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of July, 2010 ORDER The petitioner is not a party to the writ petition. 2. By judgment dated 30th November, 2009, the writ petition was disposed of directing the Commissioner for Commercial Taxes to report two vacancies, one of which arose on account of the alleged unauthorized absence of the Review Petitioner. In this review petition what the petitioner submits is that on completion of higher studies, though the review petitioner reported for duty, he is not permitted to join, which according to him, is for the reason that this court has passed the order directing that the vacancy arisen on account of his absence shall be reported to the PSC. 3. On behalf of the writ petitioner it is submitted that pursuant to the direction, vacancies were reported, he was advised and appointed by order dated 8.3.2010. 4. If as stated by the review petitioner, disciplinary action initiated on account of his alleged unauthorized absence is still pending and ultimately it is finalized in his favour, the fact that R.P.No211 /2010 :2 : pursuant to the direction in the judgment a candidate has been advised or appointed cannot act to his prejudice. 5. Therefore this review petition is disposed of clarifying that if ultimately the disciplinary action against the review petitioner is finalized in his favour, the fact that the directions in the judgment has been carried out or a candidate has joined shall not be to his prejudice. Review Petition is closed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/