Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 1]

Kerala High Court

P.K.Mukundan vs State Of Kerala Represented By on 14 March, 2008

Author: Antony Dominic

Bench: Antony Dominic

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 6953 of 2008(C)


1. P.K.MUKUNDAN, S/O.KUNJAN
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, THRISSUR.

3. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, KODUNGALLOOR.

                For Petitioner  :SRI.T.GOPALAKRISHNAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :14/03/2008

 O R D E R
                          ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                         ===============
                      W.P.(C) NO. 6953 OF 2008 C
                    ====================

                Dated this the 14th day of March, 2008

                              J U D G M E N T

In this writ petition, petitioner submits that by Ext.P1, applications were invited by the 1st respondent for appointment of AWD at Kodungalloor. It is stated that in response to Ext.P1, among others petitioner also had applied. However, there were certain litigations in which interim orders were passed against further proceedings, but subsequently all those orders have been vacated, submits the petitioner. Therefore, according to the petitioner, there is nothing in the way of the 1st respondent taking a decision on the applications that were received pursuant to Ext.P1. In view of the delay that has been caused, this writ petition has been filed.

2. If facts are as stated above, I do not think that there is any impediment in the way of the 1st respondent in taking a decision on the applications that were received in response to Ext.P1.

3. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that if there is no order restraining him for considering the applications that were received, the 1st respondent shall take a decision on the applications received in response to Ext.P1 and a final decision in this matter shall be WPC 6953/08 :2 : taken. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment.

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance.

ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE.

Rp