Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 44668
KERALA HIGH COURT
*S. Manikumar, C. J., Shaji P. Chaly, J.
Mr. Anwar Sadath V.M. – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
W.P.(C) No. 24355 of 2020
For the Appellants/Petitioners: Mr. Raju Joseph, Mr. Sanjay Parikh
For the Respondents: Ms. O. A. Nuriya, Mr. C. M. Mohammed Iquabal
A review petition is not maintainable if the judgment has been acted upon and exhausted, as established by precedent.
Headnote:(A) Kerala Court Rules - Review Petition - Third party applications for review against upheld judgment - Review not maintainable if judgment acted upon - Precedents cited: State of Nagaland v. Toulvi Kibami, Sh. C. Lawmzuala v. Mizoram University. Government implemented scholarship orders based on 2011 census and invited applications from eligible minority students for the Prof. Joseph Mundassery Scholarship. (Paras 6, 10, 14)
(B) Review petition - Review cannot be maintained once judgment executed and acted upon, regardless of subsequent petitions.
Facts of the case:
The review petitions were filed by Mr. Anwar Sadath and Mr. Muhammed Ashraf challenging a judgment that had already been implemented by the State of Kerala concerning scholarship restructuring for minority communities. Government orders had been issued based on census data.
Findings of Court:
The court relied on precedent, affirming that once a judgment has been acted upon, review petitions related to it are not maintainable in law. It thus upheld the decision that the review petitions were to be dismissed.
Issues: The legality of third-party review applications when the original judgment has been executed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court confirmed that actions taken under a judgment exhaust its power, thereby rendering any review ineffective, as seen in Toulvi Kibami's case.
Result: Review petitions are dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. judgment implementation details regarding scholarships. (Para 1 , 2 , 6) |
| 2. notification for scholarship applications invited. (Para 3 , 5) |
| 3. review petition unmaintainable due to judgment action. (Para 10 , 12) |
1. On 15/09/2021, we passed the following order:
“Being aggrieved by the judgment in W.P.(C) No.24355 of 2020 dated 28/05/2021, Mr. Anwar Sadath V.M., a third party, has filed I.A. No.1 of 2021 seeking leave of this Court to review the abovesaid judgment. So also, one Mr. Muhammed Ashraf K.K., a third party, has filed I.A. No.1 of 2021 for the very same purpose.
2. On this day, when the leave applications came up for hearing, Mr. Raju Joseph, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the writ petitioner / 1st respondent herein, submitted that acting on the judgment in W.P.(C) No.24355 of 2020 dated 28/05/2021, State of Kerala has already issued orders implementing the decision of this Court.
3. Ms. O. A. Nuriya, learned counsel appearing for Minority Indians Planning and Vigilance Committee Trust, respondent No.5, submitted that being aggrieved by the judgment in W.P.(C) No.24355 of 2020 dated 28/05/2021, a Special Leave Petition has been preferred by the abovesaid respondent and that the same is pending.
4. Though Mr. Sanjay Parikh, learned Senior Advocate appearing for Mr. Anwar Sadath V.M., one of the review petitioners, submitted that even though the Government have acted upon the decision in issuing appropriate orders, still, as on date, the right to seek for review is available to a third party and thus leave applications can be taken up for hearing, we are of the view that appropriate decision would be taken after considering the orders of the Government and the details of the Special Leave Petition filed by respondent No.5 / additional respondent No.4 in the writ petition.
5. Statements to the above effect be filed by learned counsel for respondents 1 and 5 (writ petitioner and additional respondent No.4 therein).”
2. 1st respondent / writ petitioner has filed affidavits in the review petitions, stating that, implementing the judgment in W.P.(C) No. 24355 of 2020 dated 28/05/2021, sought to be reviewed, Government have issued Ext. R1(a) G.O. (MS) No.135/2021 / GAD dated 16/07/2021, deciding to disburse scholarship on the basis of 2011 census, to all the eligible minority communities, including Parsis (Muslim 26.56%, Christian 18.36%, Buddhists 0.01%, Jains 0.01%, Sikhs 0.01% etc.), and recommended to disburse the benefits, on the basis of the population percentage, and without causing any loss to any minority community.
3. For brevity, G.O. (MS) No.135/2021 / GAD dated 16/07/2021 is reproduced:
“Government of Kerala
Abstract
Minorities Welfare Department - Ratio of Minority Students Scholarship Restructured - In compliance with the Directions issued by the Hon'ble Kerala High Court as per Judgment dated 28/05/2021 in WP.(C) No. 24355/2020. - Implementing orders issued.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
General Administration (Minority Welfare) Department
G.O (MS) No.135/2021 / GAD Dated Thiruvananthapuram, 16/07/2021
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Reference: 1. G.O (MS) No. 278/2008 / GAD dated 16/08/2008
2. G.O (MS) No. 57/2011 GAD dated 22/02/2011
3. G.O (RT) No. 3427/2015 GAD dated 08/05/2015
4. Judgment dated 28/05/2021 in W.P (C) 24355/2020 of the Hon'ble High Court of Kerala.
5. Minutes of the All Party Meeting presided by the Hon'ble Chief Minister on 04/06/2021.
6. G.O (RT) No.2194/2021 GAD dated 14/06/2021
7. Procedure Notes of the Expert Committee Meeting held on 15/06/2021 and 29/06/2021.
ORDER
The Hon'ble High Court of Kerala as per Ref No(4) have held that the action of the State Government in Sub classifying the minorities by providing merit - cum - means scholarship at 80% to Muslim community and 20% to Latin Catholic Christians and converted Christians c
