Disposed

Tomy Sebastian v. C.M. Thomas

Kerala HC20 Oct 2011WP(C)/7823/2010

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In two writ petitions one challenging an appointment of a respondent as an AWD and the other challenging suspension of his licence the High Court disposed of the matters by directing the District Collector to consider the issues in accordance with directions of the Commissioner of Civil Supplies within eight weeks.

What did the court decide?

Petitions disposed by directing the District Collector to consider the matter with notice to parties as expeditiously as possible within eight weeks of receipt of this judgment.

Tomy Sebastian Vs C.M. Thomas — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 20TH OCTOBER 2011 / 28TH ASWINA 1933

¶4

WP(C).No. 7823 of 2010(C)

¶5

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

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

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

¶8

TOMY SEBASTIAN, S/O.SEBASTIAN, AGED 42, VALIKULATH HOUSE, MOOLAMATTOM P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.JOHNSON MANAYANI, SRI.BENHUR JOSEPH MANAYANI.

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

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

¶12

1. C.M.THOMAS, ST.MARTIN AGENCIES, ARAKULAM.

¶13

2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PAINAVU, IDUKKI.

¶14

3. THE COMMISSIONER FOR CIVIL SUPPLIES, MUSEUM ROAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶15

R1 BY ADVS. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN, SRI.K.S.SAJEEV KUMAR. R2 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SANJEETHA

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20/10/2011 ALONG WITH WPC.NO.29780 OF 2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Kss

¶18

WPC.NO.7823/2010 C

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶21

P1: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DTD. 27/07/2009.

¶22

P2: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH THE INTERIM APPLICATION DTD. 29/07/2009.

¶23

P3: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT.

¶24

P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 4/02/2010 OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT.

¶25

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

Kss

ANTONY DOMINIC, J.

¶30

¶31

W.P.(C) Nos.7823 & 29780 of 2010

¶32

¶33

Dated this the 20^th day of October, 2011

¶34

J U D G M E N T

¶35

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

¶36

The petitioner in W.P.(C) No.7823/2010

¶37

approached this Court, challenging the appointment of the first respondent as AWD No.1 of Thodupuzha Taluk. It is seen that the appointment of the first respondent was the subject matter of an appeal filed before the Commissioner of Civil Supplies and that, by order dated 21.02.2010, the Commissioner has remanded the matter to the District Collector for fresh consideration. The matter is now pending before the District Collector.

¶38

Meanwhile, the licence granted to the first respondent was suspended and it is challenged by him in W.P.(C) No.29780/2010.

¶39

Now that the very appointment of the first respondent in W.P.(C) No.7823/2010 stands remitted to the District Collector for consideration, the issues raised in these

¶40

W.P.(C) No.7823&29780/2010

¶41

: 2 :

¶42

writ petitions are to be considered by the District Collector himself.

¶43

Therefore, I dispose of these writ petitions,

¶44

directing that the District Collector shall consider the matter pursuant to the directions of the Commissioner of Civil Supplies in the order referred to above, with notice to the parties concerned and as expeditiously as possible. While doing so, contentions raised by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.29780/2010 will also be raised before the District Collector and considered by the said authority.

¶45

Orders shall be passed as above, at any rate, within eight weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶46

Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)

¶47

aks/20/10

¶48

// True Copy //

¶49

P.A. To Judge

Tomy Sebastian v. C.M. Thomas

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Tomy Sebastian v. C.M. Thomas

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

St.Mary'S Jacobite Syrian Church Vs the District Collector, Collectorate

Reshma T.B. and Others Vs the Principal and Chief Superintendent&

Alex L.Abraham Vs Mahatma Gandhi University

Saritha V.K. Vs K.C. Satheesan

Shammy Thilakan Vs Sreekumar and Others

The Principal,Hahajubilee Training Colle Vs University of Calicut and Another