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 4]

Kerala High Court

Naveen K. Mohan vs Union Of India on 11 June, 2020

Author: Anu Sivaraman

Bench: Anu Sivaraman

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

               THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

    THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2020 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1942

                       WP(C).No.11438 OF 2020(D)


PETITIONER:

               NAVEEN K. MOHAN
               AGED 34 YEARS
               S/O. K. R. MOHAN, KAVUPURAYKAL HOUSE, KARIMUGHAL,
               PUTHENCRUZ P. O., ERNAKULAM - 682 302.

               BY ADV. SRI.J.RAMKUMAR

RESPONDENTS:

      1        UNION OF INDIA
               DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES,
               MINISTRY OF FINANCE, 3RD FLOOR,
               JEEVAN DEEP BUILDING, SANSAD MARG, NEW DELHI -110001,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY.

      2        INSURANCE REGULATORY DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF INDIA
               SY.NO.115/1, FINANCIAL DISTRICT, NANAKRAMGUDA,
               GACHIBOWLI, HYDERABAD - 500 032,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.

               SRI.P.VIJAYAKUMAR, ASGI
               SRI.K.L. NARASIMHAN, SC TAC AND IR&DA

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.06.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.11438 OF 2020

                                       2




                                JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent.

2. The substantial prayer raised in this writ petition is for a consideration of Ext.P3 representation with regard to the application for renewal of license as Surveyor and Loss Assessor. It is submitted that though the petitioner's licence expired on 21.05.2020 and an online application for renewal had been submitted well within time, the same has not been considered. Pointing out this aspect, the petitioner had approached the 2nd respondent preferring Ext.P3 representation.

3. The learned counsel for the 2nd respondent submits that Ext.P3 representation as well as the online application for renewal of licence has been received by the 2nd respondent and it was only due to the lock down that the same was not considered. It is submitted that the application for renewal of licence will be considered without delay.

4. In the above circumstances, there will be a direction to the 2 nd respondent to take up and consider the application preferred by the petitioner as referred to in Ext.P3 for renewal of licence as Surveyor and WP(C).No.11438 OF 2020 3 Loss Assessor and to pass orders on the same within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE np WP(C).No.11438 OF 2020 4 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE BEARING NO.IRDA/IND/SLA-120343/21/5/2020 DATED 22.05.2017 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE EMAIL COMMUNICATION DATED 4.5.2020 FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT SHOWING THE RECEIPT OF APPLICATION FOR RENEWAL OF LICENSE.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 11.05.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL