Disposed

Shaji and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Kerala HC3 Nov 2011WP(C)/6571/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought directions to publish a fresh seniority list via representation instead of challenging an order in the Writ Court. The CourtAccepted the petitioners' proposal to file a representation before the 4th respondent.

What did the court decide?

The petition was disposed of and the petitioners were directed to file a representation before the 4th respondent to be considered and appropriate orders passed.

Shaji and Others Vs State of Kerala and Others — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2011 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1933

¶4

WP(C).No. 6571 of 2011(V)

¶5

-------------------------

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

------------------------

¶8

1. SHAJI, AGED 39, SHAJI NIVAS, KUDAPPANAKUNNU.P.O., KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶9

2. UDAYAKUMAR.T., AGED 42, UDAYABHAVAN, ERAPPAKUZHY.P.O., KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶10

3. NIRMALAKUMARI.R., AGED 40,

¶11

VARUVILAKATHVEED, SREENAGAR, MANIKANTESWARAM.P.O., VATTIYOORKAVU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶12

4. BABU.K., AGED 39, KUNJILAMOODU, KUDAPPANAKUNNU.P.O., KUDAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶13

5. ANEESH KUMAR.S.V., AGED 25, DEEPA NIVAS, KUDAPPANAKUNNU, (NOW R/AT ASHA BHAVAN MANJAMKODU.P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM).

¶14

BY ADV. SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SRI.RAJAN VELLOTH SRI.SAIJO HASSAN SRI.PRATHAP PILLAI SRI.RAFEEK. V.K. SRI.BENOJ C AUGUSTIN SRI.SEBIN THOMAS

¶15

tss

¶16

W.P(C) NO.6571/2011

¶17

RESPONDENT(S):

¶18

--------------------------

¶19

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM POST 695 001.

¶20

2. DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.695 001.

¶21

3. SUPERINTENDENT, DISTRICT LIVE STOCK FARM KODAPPANAKUNNU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 695 001.

¶22

4. DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICER, DISTRICT ANIMAL HUSBANDRY OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, 695 001.

¶23

BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.E.M.ABDUL KHADER

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

tss

¶26

W.P.(C) NO.6571/2011

¶27

APPENDIX

¶28

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶29

P1:- COPY OF THE GO(MS) 231/10/AD DTD. 31.8.2010 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT.

¶30

P2:- COPY OF THE LIST CONTAINING THE DETAILSOF LABOURERS WORKED IN THE DISTRICT LEVEL STOCK FARMS DAILY WAGES TILL 24.8.2006 PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶31

P3:- COPY OF THE LIST CONTAINING THE DETAILS OF LABOURERS WORKED TILL 24.8.06 PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶32

P4:- COPY OF THE LIST CONTAINING THE DETAILS OF LABOURERES WORKED TILL 24.8.06 PREPARED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶33

P5:- COPY OF THE ORDER BEARING NO.B.8934/2011/G.K. DTD. 5.2.2011 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

¶34

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS

NIL:-

TRUE COPY

P.S. TO JUDGE

tss

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶40

W.P.(C).NO.6571 OF 2011

¶41

Dated this the 3^rd day of November, 2011.

¶42

JUDGMENT

¶43

The petitioners have approached this Court with the

¶44

following prayers:

¶45

a. Call for the records relating to the issuance of P-5 of the 4^th respondent and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order.

¶46

b. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order or direction directing the 2^nd respondent to publish fresh seniority list after considering the case of the petitioners on the basis of Exhibit P-2 and P-3 and make the appointment from the fresh seniority list.

¶47

When the matter came up for consideration before this Court on 21.3.2011, it was observed by this Court that the persons enlisted in Ext.P5 as the beneficiaries of the same are not made parties to the writ petition despite the challenge raised against Ext.P5 .

¶48

Today, when the matter is taken up for further consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have already filed a representation projecting the grievances as contained in the writ petition

¶49

W.P.(C).NO.6571 OF 2011

¶50

: 2 :

¶51

before the respondents. It is stated that the petitioners would like to pursue the matter before the 4^th respondent (who has issued Ext.P5) by filing a detailed representation and that the petitioners will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to have the matter considered passing appropriate orders within a reasonable time.

¶52

In the above circumstances, this Court does not find it necessary to consider the merits involved. If any representation is preferred by the petitioners before the 4^th respondent within two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, the same shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed in accordance with law, with regard to the grievance projected therein. Final orders in this regard shall be passed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within two months thereafter.

¶53

Writ petition is disposed of.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.

¶56

Shaji and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaji and Others v. State of Kerala and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.Narayanan Namboodiri Vs State of Kerala and Others

P.Asok Kumar Vs Department of Revenue

Anilkumar.T Vs the Kerla State Electricity Board

Bairen and Others Vs State of Kerala and Others

Leela.M. Vs State of Kerala

K.G.Rugmani Amma Vs Kerala State Electricity Board