P. R. Ramachandra Menon, CJ
1. This review petition has been filed by the 8th Respondent in WP(PIL) No. 44 of 2019. The error apparent on the face of the record, as pointed out
by the learned counsel for the review petitioner, is that as per the relevant provisions of law, the public hearing can be conducted by the authorities
mentioned therein, which need not be heard by the Member Secretary himself, due to various reasons, as explained in the review petition.
2. Heard both the sides.
3. Writ Petition (PIL) No. 44 of 2019 was disposed in terms of the judgment dated 20.06.2019 passed in WP(PIL) No. 43 of 2019. A review petition
has been filed against the judgment dated 20.06.2019 passed in WP(PIL) No. 43 of 2019 as Review Petition No. 128 of 2019, which stands disposed
of vide order dated 25.09.2019.
4. Learned counsel for the parties jointly submit that this review petition may also be disposed of in terms of the order passed in Review Petition No.
128 of 2019 decided on 25.09.2019. The operative portion of the said order is extracted below :
4. In the said circumstances, we hold that there is an 'error apparent on the face of record', as contained in the last paragraph of the order dated
20.06.2019 in WPPIL No. 43 of 2019, holding that the hearing on the objections shall be conducted by the 5th Respondent himself and not by the 6th
Respondent. This will stand corrected and modified to the effect that it shall be done by any of the competent authority as mentioned in Clause 4.1 of
the aforementioned Notification.
5. In view of the above submission, this Review Petition stands disposed of in the terms order dated 29.09.2019 passed in Review Petition No.128 of
2019.
