IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 23RD OCTOBER 2008 / 1ST KARTHIKA 1930 RP.No. 1021 of 2008() ------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.21323/2008 Dated 11/08/2008 .................................... REVIEW PETITIONER/1ST RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------- THE KOORACHUND GRAMAPANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE KORACHUDU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ATHIYADI P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.FIROZ RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 2 & 3 ------------------------------------------------------------- 1. HASEENA W/O. ASHRAF, AGED 28 YEARS, NAMPI NEETTIL THEKKE PACHOLATHU HOUSE, KAYANNA P.O., KOLOTHU VAYAL, KOORACHUNDU, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, TRIVANDRUM. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ROADS, KOYLANDY. BY GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. A.J. VARGHESE ADV. SUNNY MATHEW, R1 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =================== R.P.NO: 1021 OF 2008 IN W.P.(C) NO.21323 OF 2008 ==================== Dated this the 23rd day of October, 2008 O R D E R The review is sought for by the first respondent in the writ petition, viz., Koorachundu Grama Panchayat. It is true that when the the writ petition was disposed of the counsel was absent. Counsel for the Panchayat submits that his name was not shown in the cause list. This certainly justifies his absence. 2. Although I have heard counsel for the Panchayat, I am not satisfied that the judgment is vitiated for any reason. There is no error apparent on the face of the judgment. R.P. fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE jj