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 2]

Kerala High Court

P.Sreekumari Amma vs The State Of Kerala on 5 June, 1992

       

  

  

 
 
                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                             PRESENT:

               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

           WEDNESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2012/9TH KARTHIKA 1934

                                  WP(C).No. 25470 of 2012 (G)
                                 ----------------------------------------

PETITIONER(S):
------------------------

             P.SREEKUMARI AMMA,, AGED 70 YEARS
             W/O APPUKUTTAN NAIR(LATE), SREYAS ANRA-17
             AYANIKKAD NAGAR, PALKULANGARA P.O
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

             BY ADVS.SRI.D.SAJEEV
                          SMT.LIGEY ANTONY


RESPONDENT(S):
--------------------------

          1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
             REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
             DEVASWOM DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001

          2. THE EXECUTIVE OFFICER,
             SREE PADMANABHA SWAMY TEMPLE, MATHILAKOM OFFICE
             FORT P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695023

           R1 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.J. RAJASREE

           THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
           31-10-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:




DCS

WP(C).No. 25470 of 2012 (G)


                                APPENDIX




PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :-


EXT. P1      COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE PENSION PAYMENT
             ORDER BEARING P.P.O NO 34/1992 DATED 05-06-1992 ISSUED BY THE
             2ND RESPONDENT

EXT. P2      COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 27-10-2011 SUBMITTED
             BEFORE THE MAHARAJA OF TRAVANCORE

EXT. P3      COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04-01-2012 SUBMITTED
             BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXT. P4      COPY OF THE ADVOCATE'S NOTICE DATED 19-04-2012 ISSUED TO
             THE 2ND RESPONDENT

EXT. P5      COPY OF THE REPLY NOTICE DATED 08-05-2012 OF THE 2ND
             RESPONDENT

EXT. P6      COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S NO 1838/2010 FILED BEFORE THE
             MUNSIFF'S COURT OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

EXT. P7      COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07-09-2012 SUBMITTED
             BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT




RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:- NIL



                                                  /TRUE COPY/


                                                  P.A. TO JUDGE




DCS



               P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.
             ---------------------------------------
               W.P.(C) NO. 25470 of 2012 (G)
             ----------------------------------------
             Dated this the 31st day of October, 2012

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:-

i) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, direction or order directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders in Ext. P7 representation filed by the petitioner and order to the 2nd respondent to restore the payment of family pension to the petitioner expeditiously.
ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ direction or order directing the 2nd respondent to award the interest for the arrears of the family pension from July 2010 onwards which was withheld arbitrarily without any reasons, as expeditiously as possible.
iii) Such other appropriate writ order or direction this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice.

2. When the matter is taken up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the grievance has been projected in Ext. P7 representation filed before the 1st respondent and that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to have it considered and disposed of, within a reasonable time.

3. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

4. Considering the limited nature of the relief now pressed for and proposed to be given, this Court does not find it W.P.(C) NO. 25470 of 2012 (G) 2 necessary to issue notice to 2nd respondent for the time being. The writ petition is disposed of, directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P7, in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'three' months, from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for further steps.

sd/-

P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE DCS