Basheer Khan vs Jamal M Sainulabdeen
2021 Latest Caselaw 22633 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 28TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                        RP NO. 811 OF 2021
 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 18982/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER:

          BASHEER KHAN
          AGED 39 YEARS
          S/O. SAFARULLAH, RESIDING AT TC 41/974(3), YAHIYA
          MANZIL, PARUTHIKUZHI, POONTHURA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695026.

          BY ADVS.
          ARUN MATHEW VADAKKAN
          I.ARIF MUHAMMAD



RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3:

    1     JAMAL M SAINULABDEEN
          S/O. JAMAL MUHAMMED, TC NO.8/1502(1), SS VILLA,
          THIRUMALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695006.

    2     THESTATE POLICE CHIEF,
          KERALA STATE POLICE HEAD QUARTERS, VAZHUTHAKKAD,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695001.

    3     CITY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695001.

    4     CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
          FORT POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-
          695023.

          BY ADVS.
          THOMAS ABRAHAM
          MERCIAMMA MATHEW
          ASWIN.P.JOHN
          R.ANANTHAPADMANABAN
          GEORGE J.NALAPPAT
          PAUL BABY
          THAYYIB SHA P.S.
 RP NO. 811 OF 2021
                                     2




            SR GP SMT AMMINIKKUTTY




     THIS   REVIEW   PETITION   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
19.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 RP NO. 811 OF 2021
                                 3



                          O R D E R

This petition, seeking review of the

judgment of this Court dated 06.10.2021, has

been impelled not because there is any error

apparent on the face of it, but because certain

new developments happened thereafter.

2. The petitioner says that even though

this Court had made certain specific directions

in the judgment, the respondents, in blatant

violation of it, have now obstructed his right

to access the electrical panel of the building,

including the meter of the electric connection

allotted to his room and that same has now been

clandestinely disconnected.

3. Sri.Thomas Abraham - learned counsel

appearing for the respondents, answered the

afore submissions of Sri.Arun Mathew Vadakkan -

learned counsel for the review petitioner, RP NO. 811 OF 2021

saying that this Court has permitted his client

to take steps to ensure that, except the first

floor, no other portion of the building is

assessed by the review petitioner. He submitted

that this is all that his client has done, but

assured this Court that the meter and the

electrical panel to the 1st floor will always be

kept available for access to the review

petitioner.

Taking note of the afore and recording the

undertaking of Sri.Thomas Abraham I close this

review petition without any further orders.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS/19/11/2021 RP NO. 811 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF RP NO. 811 OF 2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS NIL

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS

ANNEXURE R1A THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 21.10.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SHO, FORT POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE R1B THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 30.10.2021 ISSUED FROM THE FORT POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE R1C THE TRUE COPY OF THE FIR IN CRIME NO.1982 OF 2021 OF FORT POLICE STATION

ANNEXURE R1D THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 7.11.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE RESPONDENT HEREIN BEFORE THE SHO, FORT POLICE STATION