This review petition, filed by Kerala State Road Transport Corporation against a writ judgment concerning a senior assistant's removal, was dismissed. The court held there was no error apparent on the face of the record and refused to review its previous decision merely because the limitation issue could be addressed later by the Appellate Tribunal.
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 V.CHITAMBARESH
TUESDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2013/16TH ASWINA, 1935
RP.No. 793 of 2013 (A) IN WP(C).26004/2012
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 26004/2012 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 12-04-2013
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/RESPONDENTS:
1. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION TRANSPORT BHAVAN, FORT P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695023.
2. THE CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR
BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA, SC, KSRTC
RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONER:
S.ANSALAM, AGED 53 YEARS
SENIOR ASSISTANT, KERALA STATE TRANSPORT CORPORATION KOTTARAKKARA, PIN 691 506 (UNDER ORDERS OF REMOVAL).
BY SRI.K.P.JUSTINE (KARIPAT)
THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08-10-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:
DCS
RP.No. 793 of 2013 (A)
APPENDIX
REVIEW PETITIONER(S)' ANNEXURE
P1. COPY OF KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) REGULATIONS 1981
RESPONDENT(S)' ANNEXURE:- NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A. TO JUDGE
DCS
V.CHITAMBARESH,J.
-------------------------------
R.P. No. 793 of 2013 IN
W.P.(C). No. 26004 of 2012
------------------------------------- Dated this the 08th day of October, 2013
O R D E R
The question whether Ext. P25 revision is barred by time or not can be considered by the Kerala State Road Transport Appellate Tribunal itself as and when such a plea is made by the review petitioner. That by itself is not a reason enough to review the judgment dated 12.04.2013.
There is no error apparent on the face of the record and the review petition is disposed of.
SD/-
V.CHITAMBARESH JUDGE
DCS
2 issues framed by the court
Whether there is an error apparent on the face of the record warranting a review of the impugned judgment.
Whether the question of limitation regarding the revision petition can be the basis for calling for a review under Article 145 Rule 5 CPC.
The Managing Director Kerala State Road Transport Corporation
S. Ansalam
V. Chitambaresh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
