IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH OCTOBER 2009 / 6TH KARTHIKA 1931 RP.No. 977 of 2009(H) ------------------------------ THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.26915/2009 DATED 24/09/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/ 1ST RESPONDENT: ------------------------------------------------------------- VELLARADA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL GRADE SECRETARY, PANCHAMOODU P.O., VELLARADA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. MR.J.S.AJITHKUMAR. RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/2ND RESPONDENT: ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. RAZIYA, W/O.NAZARUDEEN, PROPRIETRIX, BISMILLA FLOUR MILL,V.P.V/1095, BISMILLA MANZIL, PANACHAKOODU P.O., VELLARADA VILLAGE,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK. 2. A.AYYAPPAN, KADAVIKKATHU VEEDU PANACHAMOODU P.O.,NEYYATTINKARA TALUK PIN-695 505. BY ADV. MR. M RAMACHANDRAN NAIR. THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON ON 28/10/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------ R.P.No.977 OF 2009 ------------------------------- Dated this the 28th day of October, 2009 O R D E R ~~~~~~~~ This application for review is filed by a Grama Panchayat. It seeks review of a judgment issued at the stage of admission without issuing notice to the Panchayat. All that was directed was that Ext.P5 appeal be considered by the appellate committee and that Ext.P10, the order impugned in that appeal, will stand suspended. 2. I need not go into the question whether there was any suppression of fact by the petitioner, having regard to the different materials on record, and the fact that the judgment sought to be reviewed is vitiated by an error apparent on the face of it, even otherwise. 3. Ext.P2 in the Writ Petition is the licence issued by the Grama Panchayat. That is only for an oil mill. Merely because the department of Industry had given approval for a flour mill, the operator (the writ petitioner) cannot stand to function that unit without the Panchayat's licence. Therefore, the licence of the R.P. No.977/2009 2 Panchayat being only for the purpose of an oil mill, it needs to be clarified that the order of stay forming part of the judgment sought to be reviewed, will stand confined to the oil mill and the writ petitioner shall not carry on any operation of the flour mill, on the basis of the judgment sought to be reviewed. Taking into consideration, the urgency of the matter and the time frame fixed in the judgment sought to be reviewed, the Panchayat appellate committee will deal with the appeal and issue orders, at the earliest. The learned counsel for the Panchayat states that this will be done within a period of ten days. This is recorded and the Review Petition is ordered accordingly. (THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE) ps