P.S.Dinesh vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 4 March, 2011

[Cites 0, Cited by 4]

Kerala High Court

P.S.Dinesh vs The Inspector General Of Registration on 4 March, 2011

Bench: Antony Dominic

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 6733 of 2011(N)


1. P.S.DINESH, S/O.LATE SAHADEVAN,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE INSPECTOR GENERAL OF REGISTRATION,
                       ...       Respondent

2. REGISTRATION DEPUTY INSPECTOR GENERAL

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.SHAFEEK (KAYAMKULAM)

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :04/03/2011

 O R D E R
                      ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
             --------------------------------------------------
                  W.P.(C) NO.6733 OF 2011(N)
             --------------------------------------------------
             Dated this the 4th day of March, 2011

                          J U D G M E N T

Petitioner is a document writer. He prepared Exts.P5 to P8 documents. In regard to the execution of Exts.P5 to P8, P11 complaint was made against the petitioner before the 2nd respondent, which resulted in Ext.P15 order of suspension. That order was challenged by the petitioner by filing WP(c). No.4777/2011 before this Court. By Ext.P16 judgment this court relegated the petitioner to pursue the statutory remedies. However, in order to enable the petitioner to pursue the remedies, and obtain appropriate interlocutory orders, it was directed that Ext.P15 order will be kept in abeyance for a period of 2 weeks. During the aforesaid period of two weeks , petitioner filed Ext.P17 appeal before he first respondent accompanied by an application seeking stay of Ext.P15 order of suspension. The grievance of the petitioner is that without even considering the said application made by him, the first respondent adjourned Ext.P17 without any posting. It is in these circumstances the writ petition has been filed.

WPC.No. 6733/2011 :2 :

2. Having regard to the fact that Ext.P17 appeal filed by the petitioner is a statutory one, it is necessary that the first respondent should expeditiously consider either the appeal or at least the stay petition.

3. In view of the specific case of the petitioner that the first respondent adjourned the appeal without even giving a posting and as a result of expiry of 2 weeks stay granted by this court, the petitioner is prevented from carrying on his avocation, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions.

4. It is directed that Ext.P15 order of suspension will stand suspended for a period of 4 weeks from today.

5. It is directed that in the meanwhile the first respondent shall consider, if not Ext.P17 appeal, at least the stay petition filed by the petitioner and pass orders thereon with notice to him.

Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for compliance.

(ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WPC.No. 6733/2011 :3 :

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Kerala High Court