C.P.Mohammedali v. Abdul Kareem

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2015/29TH ASWINA, 1937 RP.No. 898 of 2015 (C) IN WP(C).20025/2015 -------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 20025/2015 OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 07-07-2015 REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/SECOND RESPONDENT:

--------------------------------------- C.P.MOHAMMADALI S/O.ABDUL RAHMAN HAJI, CHOLAPARAMBATHU HOUSE EDATHARA P.O., THOOTHA, VIA PERINTHALMANNA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 679357.

BY ADVS.SRI.C.M.KAMMAPPU SRI.MANSOOR.B.H.

RESPONDENT(S)/WRIT PETITIONER & FIRST RESPONDENT: -------------------------------------------------

1. ABDUL KAREEM, AGED 54 YEARS S/O.MUHAMMED, CHOLAPARAMBIL HOUSE, ALIPARAMBA ODAMALA P.O., VALAMKULAM, PERINTHALMANNA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679355.

2. THE SECRETARY REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY, MALAPPURAM 676505.

R1 BY SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.K.SAIDALAVI THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21-10-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: BKA/-

RP.No. 898 of 2015 ------------------ APPENDIX PETITIONER'(S) ANNEXURES:

ANNEXURE A COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C5/(D3)/11904/2015 DTD 3.08.2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

ANNEXURE B COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF 2ND RESPONDENT BEARING ORDER NO.C5/D31670/2013/M DATED 20.01.2015 RESPONDENT'(S) ANNEXURES: NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE bka/-

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- R.P. No. 898 of 2015 in W.P.(C) No. 20025 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 21st day of October, 2015

O R D E R

The 2nd respondent in the writ petition is in review. 2.

The review petitioner points out that the authority concerned has complied with the directions and passed orders without affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard. What was directed in the judgment was to consider Ext.P4 request of the writ petitioner taking into account the grievance of the writ petitioner projected in the writ petition within a period of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

3.

As the grievance of the petitioner is that the present order is passed without affording the petitioner an opportunity of being heard, it is open to the petitioner to challenge the same in appropriate proceedings.

Reserving the petitioner's right to challenge the present order in appropriate proceedings, the review petition is dismissed.

Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE bka/21.10.15