Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Supreme Court - Daily Orders

State Of Kerala And Ors. Etc. vs P. Haridasan And Ors. Etc. Etc. on 8 February, 2016

Bench: Fakkir Mohamed Ibrahim Kalifulla, S.A. Bobde

      ITEM NO.10                              COURT NO.6                  SECTION XIA

                                   S U P R E M E C O U R T O F     I N D I A
                                           RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

      Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (C) No(s).22374-22375/2015

      (Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 05/02/2015
      in WA No. 645/2010 in WPC No. 24546/2004 & WA No. 1124/2010 in WPC
      No. 8797/2010 passed by the High Court of Kerala at Ernakulam)

      STATE OF KERALA AND ORS. ETC.                                        Petitioner(s)

                                                     VERSUS
      P. HARIDASAN AND ORS. ETC. ETC.                                      Respondent(s)

      (with interim relief and office report)

      Date : 08/02/2016 These petitions were called on for hearing today.

      CORAM :
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE FAKKIR MOHAMED IBRAHIM KALIFULLA
                             HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S.A. BOBDE

      For Petitioner(s)                Mr.   L.N. Rao,Sr.Adv.
                                       Mr.   Nikilesh Ramachandran,Adv.
                                       Mr.   Pawan Kumar,Adv.
                                       Mr.   Gaurav Jain,Adv.

      For Respondent(s)

                          UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
                                                  O R D E R

The petitioners seek liberty to approach the High Court by way of a review, inasmuch as the point which was not raised before the High Court is being sought to be pursued in these special leave petitions, based on the earlier Division Bench judgment of that very High Court.

Therefore, with the above-said liberty, these special leave petitions stand disposed of. It is open to the petitioners to work out their remedy after the disposal of the review, as against the order impugned as well as any other order that may be passed by the Court in the Review, if they are aggrieved.

             (NARENDRA PRASAD)                                  (SHARDA KAPOOR)
               COURT MASTER                                      COURT MASTER