In an review of a writ petition closed without addressing a prayer to make interim orders absolute, the single judge found the omission was an error vitiating the judgment, allowing the review and recalling the previous judgment.
The Review Petition was allowed; the judgment dated 3rd June 2010 was recalled.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
MONDAY, THE 12TH JULY 2010 / 21ST ASHADHA 1932
RP.No. 569 of 2010() -------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.33375/2009 Dated 03/06/2010 ....................
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER IN WPC:
---------------------------------------------------------------------
DR.P.N.PREMACHANDRAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, SMALL FARMERS AGREE BUSINESS CONSORTIUM (S F A C), GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1, RESIDING AT `PRANAVAM', TC 15/285(2), ANRA 38, ALTHARA NAGAR, VELLAYAMBALAM, TRIVANDRUM-10. BY ADV. SRI.MILLU DANDAPANI
RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENT IN WPC ----------------------------------------------------------
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.N.MANOJ KUMAR
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ R.P.No.569 OF2010
IN
W.P.(C) NO. 33375 OF 2009 (N)
=====================
Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010
O R D E R
Writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 3/6/2010. Prior to the disposal of the writ petition, counsel for the petitioner had filed memo dated 25th of May 2010, reporting that in pursuance to the interim order passed by this Court, petitioner was included in the zone of consideration and was considered. It is also stated that against rejection of his candidature, he had filed OA 184/10 before the Central Administrative Tribunal, Ernakulam and that now the matter was pending consideration of this Court. Therefore, petitioner prayed that in the light of the subsequent developments, the writ petition may be closed making the interim orders dated 30/11/2009 and 22/12/2009 absolute.
RP No.569/2010 in WP(C) No.33375/09
:2 :
of this Court to consider the prayer to make the interim orders absolute was an error and that the judgment should be reviewed on that basis.
Accordingly, the Review Petition will stand allowed and the judgment dated 3rd of June, 2010 will stand recalled.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the omission to consider the petitioner's prayer to make interim orders absolute vitiated the judgment warranting a review.
DR.P.N.PREMACHANDRAN
STATE OF KERALA
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
