IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 14TH OCTOBER 2008 / 22ND ASWINA 1930 RP.No. 991 of 2008(A) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.18698/2008 .................... PETITIONER/3RD RESPONDENT & 4TH RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------------------ 1. AROOKUTTY GRAMA PANCHAYAT REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYATH OFFICE AROOKUTTY PO., ALAPPUZHA. 2. SECRETARY, AROOKUTTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH. BY ADV. SRI.P.N.PURUSHOTHAMA KAIMAL RESPONDENT/PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS 1,2,5 TO 9 IN WPC: ------------------------------------------------------------------------ 1. ASIYA ABDULSALAM, NILAMATH MANZIL, NADUVATH NAGAR PO., ALAPPUZHA. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, ALAPPUZHA 3. S.I OF POLICE, POOCHAKKAL, POOCHAKKAL PO. 4. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT GOVT.SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD ALISSERY ROAD, SOUTH OF COLLECTORATE JN., ALAPPUZHA-688001. 6. PRASANNAN, MEMBER, WARD NO.11, AROOKUTTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PANCHAYATH OFFICE, AROOKUTTY PO., ALAPPUZHA. RP NO.991/08 -2- 7. SECRETARY, SANGAMITHRA PURUSHA SWAYAM SAHAYA SANGAM, NADUVATHU NAGAR, AROOKKUTTY, CHERTHALA. 8. PRESIDENT, SANGAMITHRA PURUSHASWAYAM SAHAYA SANGAM, N.NAGAR, AROOKUTTY, CHERTHALA. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHANDAS, SC FOR PCB SRI.P.M.PAREETH SRI.P.BABUKUMAR SRI.R.MURALEEKRISHNAN THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== R.P.NO.991 OF 2008 IN W.P.(C) NO. 18698 OF 2008 (A) ==================== Dated this the 14th day of October, 2008 O R D E R Review is filed by the Arookutty Grama Panchayat, which was 3rd respondent in WP(C) No.18698/08. 2. The writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 8/8/08 directing implementation of Ext.P2 resolution dated 15/5/2007. The ground urged is that by a resolution passed by the Panchayat on 29/8/08, they have cancelled the resolution, which was directed to be implemented by this Court. 3. First of all, it is not permissible for the Panchayat to get over a writ of mandamus issued by this Court by passing a resolution as they have passed on 29/8/08 and to nullify a judgment rendered by this court. Secondly, the contention that there was objection to the implementation of Ext.P2 resolution is one lacking any bonafides. The reason is that the petitioner filed the writ petition on 20/6/08 seeking implementation of the resolution dated 15/5/2007. Therefore, if at all the Panchayat had any reason to recall the resolution, the Panchayat had sufficient time to do so before the writ petition was filed. Even when the matter was heard, the RP 991/08 :2 : Panchayat had not appraised this court that there was any proposal for cancelling the resolution. Therefore, the so called objection by the residents is not a bonafide reason for cancellation of the resolution. For these reasons, I am not satisfied that the judgment deserves to be reviewed. Review petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp