The Convenor, Auto Drivers Union vs Roland
2021 Latest Caselaw 23741 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
                     RP NO. 865 OF 2021
  AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 7664/2020 OF HIGH COURT OF
                           KERALA
REVIEW PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 4, 5 & 6 IN WPC 7664/2020:

    1     THE CONVENOR, AUTO DRIVERS UNION
          (CITU) AROOR JUNCTION, CHERTHALA-688534
    2     THE CONVENOR,
          AUTO DRIVERS UNION (BMS) AROOR JUNCTION,
          CHERTHALA-688534
    3     THE CONVENOR
          AUTO DRIVERS UNION (INTUC), AROOR JUNCTION,
          CHERTHALA-688534
          BY ADVS.V.N.HARIDAS
          SAIFUDEEN T.S
          M.MANU

RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1,2 & 3 IN WPC 7664/2020

    1     ROLAND, AGED 52 YEARS
          S/O. EASSY, KOIMMAPARAMBIL, AROOR P.O., CHERTHALA
    2     AOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PANCHAYAT OFFICE,
          AROOR P.O., CHERTHALA REP BY ITS SECRETARY
    3     THE SECRETARY, AROOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
          PANCHAYAT OFFICE, AROOR P.O.,CHERTHALA -688 534
    4     THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
          AROOR POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA-688 534


          SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP,
          SRI.B.PRAMOD- REPSONDENT,
          SRI.V.N.SANKARJEE FOR RESPONDENTO


     THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 30.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 RP 865/2021 in wpc 7664/2020

                                 2




                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                    --------------------------------
                       R.P.No.865 of 2021
                                   in
                    W.P.(C).No.7664 of 2020
             ----------------------------------------------
          Dated this the 30th day of November, 2021


                               ORDER

This review petition is filed to review the judgment

dated 22.07.2021 in W.P.(C). No.7664 of 2020. The main

grievance of the review petitioners is that they were not

able to submit their grievance about Ext.P5 resolution

before this Court at the time of hearing.

2. This Court, as per judgment dated 22.07.2021,

directed respondents 1 and 2 to take follow up action

based on Ext.P5 resolution. According to the review

petitioners, they want to challenge Ext.P5 resolution. The

counsel for the writ petitioner, who is the 1 st respondent

herein, submitted that Ext.P5 is already implemented.

I make it clear that this judgment will not stand in

the way of the review petitioners to challenge Ext.P5 RP 865/2021 in wpc 7664/2020

resolution, if they are aggrieved and if their contentions

are legally sustainable.

With the above observation, this review petition is

disposed of.

Sd/-

                                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV                                        JUDGE