Disposed
Shibhu George v. State of Kerala
Kerala HCRP/470/2012
Case brief
from the order text
What is this about?
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE…
What the court decided
AI extract
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
TUESDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF JUNE 2012/15TH JYAISHTA 1934
RP.No. 470 of 2012 ()
AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN WPC.NO.1196/2012 DATED 21/5/2012
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/PETITIONER:
SHIBU GEORGE, NJARAKKATTU HOUSE,EZHUMATTOOR.P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.SRI.SATHISH NINAN SRI.SANTHOSH MATHEW SRI.ARUN THOMAS
SRI.JENNIS STEPHEN
RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2. KOIPURAM BLOCK PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,KOIPURAM-689 531.
3. SHRI.ABRAHAM SAMUEL, KEECHERIL HOUSE,MALLAPPALLY WEST.P.O,MALLAPPALLY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT,PIN-689 520.
4. THE PRESIDENT, KOIPURAM BLOCK PANCHAYATH,KOIPURAM-689 531.
R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. M.MUHAMMED SHAFI
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
Kss
RP.NO.470/2012
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S ANNEXURES:
ANNEX.2: COPY OF THE REPLY RECEIVED BY THE REVIEW PETITIONER FROM THE KOIPURAM BLOCK PANCHAYAT.
ANNEX.3: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DTD. 28/04/2012 SUBMITTED BY THE REVIEW PETITIONER BEFORE THE ASSISTANT DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER, PATHANAMTHITTA.
RESPONDENT'S ANNEXURES: N I L
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
Kss
ANTONY DOMINIC,J
R.P.No.470 of 2012 in W.P.(c) No.1196 of 2012
Dated this the 5th day of June, 2012
JUDGMENT
Two contentions are raised in this review petition.
R.P.No.470 of 2012 2
Counsel for the Panchayath contended that the Panchayath had to take over the machineries for the reason that despite various notices, the petitioner did not remove the machineries. It is also submitted that the Panchayath has no objection in returning the machineries to the petitioner.
R.P. is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
ln
SHIBU GEORGE
STATE OF KERALA
KOIPURAM BLOCK PANCHAYATH
SHRI.ABRAHAM SAMUEL
THE PRESIDENT, KOIPURAM BLOCK PANCHAYATH
ANTONY DOMINIC
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court