IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.T.SANKARAN FRIDAY, THE 23RD JANUARY 2009 / 3RD MAGHA 1930 RP.No. 537 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WA.2313/2007 Dated 03/10/2007 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/APELLANT/RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, COASTAL, SHIPPING & TRANSPORT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA RESPONDENTS/RESPONDDENTS/PETITIONER&1ST RES IN W.P.(C): ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. SHIPING & NAVIGATION WORKERS UNION (AITUC) TRADE, UNION HOUSE, CANNON SHED ROAD, KOCHI.3 REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, K.VIJAYAKUMAR 2. KSINC, EMPLOYEES FEDERATION INTUC, KSINC FERRY TERMINAL, ERNAKULAM, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, K.P.HARIDAS. 3. KSINC EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,, KSINC FERRY TERMINAL, ERNAKULAM CITU, REP. BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, K.Y.MEHABOOB. 4. KERALA SHIPPING & INLAND NAVIGATION CORPORATION LTD. GANDHI NAGAR COCHIN-21, REP. BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/01/2009, ALONG WITH R.P.NOS.871/2008 & 852/2008 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY, Ag.CJ & K.T.SANKARAN, J. =========================== R.P.No.537/2008 in W.A.No.2313/2007, R.P.No.852/2008 in W.A.No.2336/2007 and R.P.No.871/2008 in W.A.No.2380/2007 =============================== Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2009. O R D E R Koshy, Ag.CJ. In the judgments under review, appeals filed by the State were dismissed by the learned Judge following the dictum of the Division Bench in Kavirajan v. KSBC (2007 (2) KLT 917). Main contention raised in the review petitions is that the decision was doubted and referred to a Larger Bench. But, in these judgments under review, it is held that there is no infirmity in the Kavirajan's case (supra). The fact that similar matter is referred to a larger Bench is not a ground for review. A review petition cannot be equated to a petition for re-hearing of the matter or an appeal petition. If anybody is aggrieved by the judgment, it is for them to file an appeal before the Honourable Supreme Court. No grounds are made out to review the judgments and accordingly, review petitions are dismissed. J.B.KOSHY, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE. K.T.SANKARAN, JUDGE. bkn/-