Dr.P.P.Bhaskaran v. M.V.Kannan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.M.SHAFFIQUE & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.HARILAL FRIDAY, THE 26TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2014/5TH POUSHA, 1936 WA.No. 2013 of 2014 () IN RP.1052/2014 ---------------------------------------- AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN RP 1052/2014 IN W.P(C).NO.32425/20014 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA APPELLANT(S):
------------- DR.P.P.BHASKARAN, S/O.KELAN, RESIDING AT 'MAMATHA', HIGHWAY JUNCTION, P.O.VALAPPANAM, KANNUR.
BY ADV. SRI.N.DHARMADAN (SR.) RESPONDENT(S):
--------------
1. M.V.KANNAN, SECRETARY, PAPPINISSERY VISHA CHIKILSA SOCIETY, RESIDING AT 'JYOTHIS', THAVAKKARA, KANNUR-670 561.
2. M.V.RAJESH, S/O.M.V.RAGHAVAN, AGED 43, MELETH VEEDU, BURNASSERI, CANTONMENT-P.O., KANUR-670 001.
3. M.V. GIRISHKUMAR, PRESIDENT PAPPINISSERY PANCHAYATH VISHA CHIKILSA SOCIETY JYOTHIS, THAVAKKARA, KANNUR - 670 561.
4. K.K. NANU SECRETARY PAPPINISSERY PANCHAYATH VISHA CHIKILSA SOCIETY SREENAS, PUTHIYAKAVU, PAPPINISSERY WEST P.O.
KANNUR - 670561.
5. THE VICE CHANCELLOR KERALA UNIVERSITY OF HEALTH SERVICES MEDICAL COLLEGE P.O., THRISSUR - 680 596.
R5 BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR,SC,KERALA UTY.HEALTH & BY SRI.P.SATHISAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26-12-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
A.M.SHAFFIQUE & K.HARILAL, JJ ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No.2013 of 2014 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th December, 2014
JUDGMENT
Shaffique, J.
This appeal has been filed against the order dated 20.12.2014 in R.P.No.1052 of 2014 in W.P(C).No.32425 of 2014. The judgment was passed by the learned Single Judge in the Writ Petition on 3.12.2014. In the Writ Petition a review petition came to be filed by certain third parties. The learned Single Judge passed the order impugned directing that all orders passed pursuant to the judgment dated 3.12.2014 shall stand suspended without any consequences flowing therefrom.
2. The learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant submits that though the learned Single Judge could have entertained the Review Petition, the observations in paragraphs 2 to 4 of the order was not warranted.
WA.2013/14
3. Apparently, it is only an interim order passed and the findings thereon are only for the purpose of the interim order, which cannot have any bearing while adjudicating the matter on merits. Under such circumstances, we do not think that the apprehension expressed by the appellant is justified. The order passed is only of interim nature and can force only until final orders are passed in the Review Petition.
Under such circumstances, there is no reason to interfere with the order impugned. Accordingly, we close the Writ Appeal.
A.M.SHAFFIQUE, JUDGE K.HARILAL, JUDGE vgs26/12/14