Allowed

Union of India v. Edavankorath Narayana Nambiar & Another

Kerala HC8 Mar 2011RP/132/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala allowed a review petition in a writ case concerning the sanctioning of freedom fighters pension. The court recalled the impugned judgment due to a prosecution admitted mistake where pension was allegedly sanctioned to a person with a similar name instead of the petitioner.

What did the court decide?

Review petition allowed; judgment in W.P.(C) No.22667/2010 recalled; matter posted for further hearing after two weeks.

Union of India Vs Edavankorath Narayana… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 8TH MARCH 2011 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1932

¶5

RP.No. 132 of 2011(G)

¶6

--------------------AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.22667/2010 Dated 12/11/2010

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER(S): RESPONDENTS 1 & 2

¶8

-------------------------------------------------------------------

¶9

1. UNION OF INDIA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, P.F.DIVISION, NEW DELHI.

¶10

2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FREEDOM FIGHTERS DIVISION, MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS, LOK NAYAK BHAVAN, NEW DELHI.

¶11

BY ADV. SRI.S.KRISHNAMOORTHY, CGC

¶12

RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONERS/3RD RESPONDENTS

¶13

---------------------------------------------------------------------------

¶14

1. EDAVANKOROTH NARAYANAN NAMBIAR, NEDIYANGA, KAVUMBHAI, KETTUMUGHAM, SREEKANDAPURAM, KANNUR DISTRICT-670 631.

¶15

2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, GENERAL ADMINISTRATION (FFP.A) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶16

GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH

¶17

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ R.P.No.132 OF 2011

¶19

¶20

W.P.(C) NO. 22667 OF 2010

¶21

=====================

¶22

Dated this the 8^th day of March, 2011

¶23

O R D E R

¶24

The writ petition was disposed of by judgment dated 12^th November, 2010 recording the submission made on behalf of the review petitioners that, by order dated 4/10/2010, freedom fighters pension has been sanctioned to the petitioner in the writ petition.

¶25

In this review petition, it is averred that pension was sanctioned to one Edavan Narayanan Nambiar and that it was by way of a mistake that submission was made that the petitioner was sanctioned the pension. It is also submitted that the said submission has happened to be made on account of the similarity in the name of the petitioner and the person in whose favour orders have been issued. On this basis, counsel submits that, it was on account of the mistake committed that the judgment happened to be rendered and he seeks review of the same.

¶26

I heard the counsel appearing for the 1^st respondent and the learned Government Pleader appearing for the 2^nd

R.P.No.132/11 in

WPC No.22667/10

:2 :

respondent. In substance, the submission made on behalf of the review petitioners is more of a confession of a mistake committed.

¶31

If the facts are as stated, it is obvious that a mistake has happened.

¶32

Therefore, I allow the review petition and recall the judgment in WP(C) No.22667/2010.

¶33

Post the writ petition after two weeks for further hearing.

¶34

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶35

Union of India v. Edavankorath Narayana Nambiar & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Union of India v. Edavankorath Narayana Nambiar & Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Merina & Merina Victor and Others Vs State of Kerala & Others

Biju Damodaran Vs District Collector

Thomas Karakkavayalil Vs the Registrar of Co-Op.Societies

K.Ramachandran Vs K.S.Sreenivas,Ias

V.K.Kunju Moideen Vs R.D.O. Kottayam.

Kunnath Chemical (P) Ltd. Vs K.W.A. and Anothers