ARUN,J. - (1.)This review petition is an offshoot of the petitioner's relentless crusade against the order dismissing her from the service of the first respondent Bank. The essential facts are as under;
The petitioner, while working as Peon in the first respondent Bank, was terminated from service on 25/6/2008. The disciplinary committee of the Bank dismissed her appeal against the order of termination. Thereupon, she preferred ARC.No.106 of 2011. By award dtd. 6/3/2018, the Co-operative Arbitration Court set aside the punishment of dismissal and directed reinstatement with immediate effect, but without back wages and service benefits. Being aggrieved by the award, to the extent it denied back wages to her, the petitioner preferred appeal No.24 of 2018 before the Co-operative Tribunal. On their part, the first respondent filed revision petition No.57 of 2018 against the same award. The first respondent's challenge was against setting aside the order of dismissal and direction to reinstate the petitioner in service. While the revision and appeal were pending before the Co-operative Tribunal, the petitioner filed W.P.(C) No.19899 of 2018 before this Court seeking enforcement of the directions in the award. The writ petition was disposed of by judgment dtd. 10/8/2018, directing the Joint Registrar to take necessary action in accordance with the law, subject to any interim or final orders to be passed by the Co-operative Tribunal. Thereafter, the revision petition and appeal were disposed of by the Co-operative Tribunal on 30/8/2018, upholding the award to the extent the punishment of dismissal was set aside and reinstatement ordered. The award was interfered with to the extent it denied back wages and service benefits to the petitioner. Consequently, the first respondent was directed to grant all service and monetary benefits.

(2.)The first respondent has challenged the award of the Cooperative Arbitration Court and judgment of the Co-operative Tribunal in W.P(C).No.30582 of 2018. While admitting the writ petition on 18/9/2018, this Court stayed the operation of the award and the judgment. Petitioner filed I.A.No.2 of 2018, seeking to vacate the interim order. The prayer for vacating the interim order was declined vide order dtd. 5/11/2018. The petitioner challenged that order in W.A.No.8 of 2019 and the appeal was dismissed as per judgment dtd. 8/2/2019. This petition is filed seeking review of the judgment on the premise that there are errors apparent on the face of the judgment.
(3.)The petitioner, appearing in-person, put forth various contentions. The primary contention is that the learned Single Judge had committed a grave mistake in refusing to vacate the interim order, relying on the decision in Ambika v. Kottappadi Service Co-operative Bank Ltd. [2018 (3) KLT 779], which decision was rendered based on the decision in Maharashtra State Co-operative Housing Finance Corporation Ltd. v. Prabhakar Sitaram Bhabange [(2017) 5 SCC 623]. It is contended that the Apex Court decision was rendered on an interpretation of the provisions of the Maharashtra Co-operative Societies Act, which are distinct from the related provisions in the Kerala Co-operative Societies Act. Therefore, the decision in Ambika's case is faulty and requires reconsideration.