IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN TUESDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2011 / 11TH SRAVANA 1933 RP.No. 436 of 2011(A) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.29848/2009 Dated 30/03/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 3&4: ---------------------- 1. THE GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR. 2. THE ADMINISTRATOR, GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM, GURUVAYUR-680 101. BY ADV. SRI.V.KRISHNA MENON RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1,2&5: --------------- 1. GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM EMPLOYEES' ASSOCIATION REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY C.V.VIJAYAN. 2. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE (DEVASWOM) DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. ADV. SRI.SAJEEVKUMAR GOPAL FOR R1 SRI.P.C.IYPE, ADDL. ADVOCATE GENERAL FOR R2 & 3 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX ANNEXURE A: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION NOS.30473 & 30474 OF 2009. ANNEXURE B: TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COMMITTEE CONSTITUTED BY THE GOVERNMENT. ANNEXURE C: TRUE COPY OF ORDER OF THE STATE GOVERNMENT DT.15.12.2010. ANNEXURE D: COPY OF DECISION OF THE GURUVAYUR DEVASWOM MANAGING COMMITTEE DT.6.1.2011. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. .................................................................... R.P. No.436 of 2011 in W.P.(C) No.29848 of 2009 .................................................................... Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2011. ORDER Ramachandran Nair, J. The Review Petition is filed by Guruvayur Devaswom for modifying the judgment whereunder we directed acquisition of 100 metres of land around the Guruvayur Temple in all directions. Even though part of the land is acquired, Devaswom has to acquire extensively for compliance with the judgment which is confirmed by Supreme Court. Counsel appearing for respondents submitted that notification under Section 4(1) of the Land Acquisition Act is issued covering all the properties. Review Petition is now filed stating that on the northern side the ring road is within the 100 metres and so much so, acquisition should be limited upto the road and not upto 100 metres as ordered in the judgment. We have seen the sketch produced and have also heard counsel for the respondents. 2. Counsel for the respondents referred to Central Government's 2 order to the Chief Secretary to Government to ensure that judgment is implemented for the purpose of safety of the temple and the people. After seeing the sketch and after hearing both sides, we do not think there is any justification to modify the judgment because on completion of acquisition upto 100 metres, road can be shifted to the boundary so that same extent of land is available on all sides around the temple which only will serve the purpose. Consequently we dismiss the Review Petition. C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR Judge P.S.GOPINATHAN Judge pms