Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Postal, vs Union of India

Postal, vs Union of India

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Feb 10, 2022
~3 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1446871

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
RP/127/2022

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Postal,

Respondent

Union of India

Excerpt

.....m.r.a k. g centre, kunnukuzhy, thiruvananthapuram 695 035 14 mohanachandran nair k residing at thiruvathira, socciabby road, aramada p.lo, 695 rp no. 127 of 2022 -3- 15 sudheendra nath t.l residing at kalabhavan, anapetty, tholicode p.o 695 541 this review petition having come up for admission on 10.02.2022, the court on the same day delivered the following:sathish ninan, j.= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = r.p. no.127 of 2022 in w.p.(c) no.11363 of 2021 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = dated this the 10th day of february, 2022o r d e rparagraph 2 of the judgment sought to be reviewed reads thus:-“today when the matter is taken up for consideration sri.m.sasindran, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, for the present, the reliefs claimed in the writ petition is being confined to respondents 10 and 11 and that the writ may be disposed of without prejudice to and reserving the rights against the other respondents.”2. by way of this review petition, it is pointedout that, what was intended by the learned counsel for the petitioner while confining the relief as against respondents 10 and 11 was only regarding the passing of an interim order in the case. misconceiving the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as one seeking disposal of the writ petition itself, ajudgment was passed reserving the rights of ther.p. no.127 of 2022 -: 2 :- petitioner. in the light thereof, the review petition is allowed and the judgment dated 07.12.2021 is recalled. the writ petition is restored back to file. sd/- sathish ninan judge kns/- //true copy// p.s. to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 21ST MAGHA, 1943 RP NO. 127 OF 2022 AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 11363/2021 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA ----- REVIEW PETITIONER/PETITIONER: POSTAL, TELECOM BSNL EMPLOYEES CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY LTD. NO. 1940, GANDHARIAMMAN KOVIL ROAD, MELE, THAMPANOOR JUNCTION, SANTHI NAGAR, PULIMOODU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

BY ADV M.SASINDRAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: 1 UNION OF INDIA MINISTRY OF COMMUNICATION, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOMMUNICATIONS, ASHOKA ROAD, SANCHAR BHAVAN, NEW DELHI 110 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY 2 THE CONTROLLER OF COMMUNICATIONS ACCOUNTS OFFICE OF THE CONTROLLER OF COMMUNICATIONS ACCOUNTS, DEPARTMENT OF TELECOM, DOOR SANCHAR BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033 3 BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD, BHARAT SANCHAR BHAVAN, HARISH CHANDRA MATHUR LANE, JANPATH NEW DELHI 110 001 REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN 4 BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD OFFICE OF THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER (TELECOM) KERALA CIRCLE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 033 REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER 5 THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER (CASH) BHARAT SANCHAR NIGAM LTD, OFFICE OF THE GENERAL MANAGER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001 RP NO. 127 OF 2022 -2- 6 PANKAJAKSHAN V RESIDING AT PRANAM, KAKKARA, KADURUR 42., KASNNUR DISTRICT 7 ASOKAN V RESIDING AT QUARTERS NO. 38, BSNAL STAFF QUARTERS, PANANVILA, NALANCHIRA P.O, 695 015 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 8 CHRISTHUDAS E RESIDING AT GMS BUNGALOW, PALAPOTTA, MUKKAMPALAMOODU, NARVAMOODU P.O, 695 528 THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

9 DINESAN M.P RESIDING AT C41, BSNL QUARTERS, PARUTHIPPARA 695 015, 10 NAGENDRAN NAIR M RESIDING AT AJU BHAVAN, PUNCHAKKARI 695 002 11 RAVEENDRAN T RESIDING AT VIJAY NIVAS, KAZHIVOOR, KAZHIVOOR P.O 21, 12 SANALKUMAR S RESIDING AT OTTAPPANAVILA VEEDU, MULLARAVILA, PERUMPAZHUTHOOR P.O, 695 126 NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 13 RAJA A RESIDING AT TC 15/1881 THARA 290, M.R.A K. G CENTRE, KUNNUKUZHY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 035 14 MOHANACHANDRAN NAIR K RESIDING AT THIRUVATHIRA, SOCCIABBY ROAD, ARAMADA P.LO, 695 RP NO. 127 OF 2022 -3- 15 SUDHEENDRA NATH T.L RESIDING AT KALABHAVAN, ANAPETTY, THOLICODE P.O 695 541 THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

SATHISH NINAN, J.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = R.P. No.127 of 2022 in W.P.(C) No.11363 of 2021 = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 10th day of February, 2022

O R D E R

Paragraph 2 of the judgment sought to be reviewed reads thus:-

“Today when the matter is taken up for consideration Sri.M.Sasindran, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, for the present, the reliefs claimed in the writ petition is being confined to respondents 10 and 11 and that the writ may be disposed of without prejudice to and reserving the rights against the other respondents.”

2. By way of this Review Petition, it is pointed

out that, what was intended by the learned counsel for the petitioner while confining the relief as against respondents 10 and 11 was only regarding the passing of an interim order in the case. Misconceiving the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner as one seeking disposal of the writ petition itself, a

judgment was passed reserving the rights of the

R.P. No.127 of 2022 -: 2 :- petitioner. In the light thereof, the Review petition is allowed and the judgment dated 07.12.2021 is recalled. The writ petition is restored back to file. Sd/- SATHISH NINAN JUDGE kns/- //True Copy// P.S. to Judge

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial