IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2011 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1933 RP.No. 139 of 2011(U) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.29577/2007 Dated 19/11/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): 3RD RESPONDENT ------------------------------------ THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, SASTHAMCOTTA BLOCK,SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. ADDL. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF ADMINISTRATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 4. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHU TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SOORANADU, KOLLAM DISTRICT. (RESPONDENTS 7,8, 10 AND 11 IN THIS REVIEW PETITION ARE TRANSPOSED AS ADDL. REVIEW PETITIONERS AS PER ORDER IN I.ANO. 221 OF 2011 DATED 25.3.2011.) BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. BASANT BALAJI. RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS -------------------------- 1. PAPPACHAN, KAVANAL VADAKKATHIL, PADINJATTAM KIZHAKKUM MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. GOPINATHAN, KARIPPONVEDU PADINJATTAM KIZHAKKUM MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 3. JOHN, KARIPPONKIZHAKKATHIL PADINJATTAM KIZHAKKUM MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. RP.No.139 of 2011 2 4. C.G.VIJAYAKUMAR, PUTHUVARATHU VEEDU, PADINJATTAM KIZHAKKUM MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 5. S.KARIM, KUNNUMPURATHU PUTHEN VEEDU, PADINJATTAM KIZHAKKUM MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 6. PODIYAN RAWTHER, PERUMKULATHU VADAKKU, PADINJATTAM KIZHAKKUM MURI, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SASTHAMCOTTA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 7.. THE SECRETARY, SOORANDU NORTH GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SOORANADU NORTH GRAMA PANCHAYATH, SOORANADU NORTH, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 8. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHU TALUK, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 9. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, SOORANADU NORTH VILLAGE, SOORANADU, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.DILEEP.P.PILLAI THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: P.N. RAVINDRAN, J. ------------------------------- R.P.No.139 of 2011 in W.P.(C) No.29577 of 2007 ------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of March, 2011 O R D E R Heard the learned counsel on both sides and perused the records including the counter affidavit which was filed on 8.2.2011 in the writ petition after the instant review petition was filed. In the writ petition, the petitioners/the respondents in the review petition, challenged the initiation of revenue recovery proceedings against them mainly on the ground that they had not entered into any agreement in terms of the provisions contained in the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Execution of Public Works) Rules and therefore they are not liable to be proceeded against. The seventh respondent in the writ petition was the convenor of the beneficiary committee who received payment in respect of the disputed work and it was he who had entered into an agreement with the Block Development Officer, Sasthamcotta. In such circumstances, I am of the opinion that prima facie the seventh respondent in the writ petition who is the 12th respondent in the review petition is liable to repay the money, even assuming that the money was not expended for the said purpose. I, therefore, find no merit in the review petition. The review petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. Post the writ petition as per roster. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. nj.