Disposed

Sheena.K. v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC1 Jun 2012WP(C)/12039/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition filed by a Scheduled Caste petitioner challenging the rejection of her application for appointment as an Authorised Retail Distributor due to the omission of a court fee stamp. The court directed the second respondent to consider her revision petition within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the revision petition and take a final decision on appointment within a period of six weeks.

Sheena.K. Vs the State of Kerala — Kerala HC (2012) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2012/11TH JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 12039 of 2012 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

SHEENA.K,, AGED 30 YEARS W/O BALAN, POTTAYIL PANATTIL HOUSE, VALLIKUNNU POST MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 673314

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SUDHEER

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001

¶11

2. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695001

¶12

3. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, MALAPPURAM 676505

¶13

4. VIJAYAN.P, MAKKILTHARA HOUSE, VALLIKUNNU POST MALAPPURAM DISTRICT 673314

¶14

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MOHAMMED SHAH

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01-06-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

DCS

¶17

WP(C).No. 12039 of 2012 (D)

¶18

APPENDIX

¶19

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :-

¶20

EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 12.01.2012.

¶21

EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF APPLICATION FOR APPOINTMENT AS AUTHORISED RETAIL DISTRIBUTOR DATED 4.2.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.

¶22

EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF ORDER NO.CS.10/3914/08(1) DATED 27.03.2012 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶23

EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF RECEIPT ISSUED BY POSTAL AUTHORITIES DATED 28.4.2012.

¶24

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED 18.5.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶25

EXHIBIT P6. COPY OF REVISION PETITION DATED 18.5.2012 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT.

¶26

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS :- NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE

DCS

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.

¶31

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

¶32

W.P.(C)No.12039 Of 2012-D

¶33

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

¶34

DATED THIS THE 1^st DAY OF JUNE, 2012

¶35

JUDGMENT

¶36

Application was invited from the members of Scheduled

¶37

Castes for appointment as Authorised Retail Distributor in Ward No.IX of Vallikunnu Grama Panchayat as per Exhibit P1. The petitioner has submitted an application, Exhibit P2, under Clause 45(2) of the Kerala Rationing Order. But, the petitioner was informed that the application cannot be considered as she failed to affix court fee stamp of Rs.5/- in Exhibit P2 application. According to the petitioner, the same is not required.

¶38

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has already filed a revision petition before the Government as well as before the 2^nd respondent as per Exhibits P5 and P6 respectively and it is prayed that the revision petition may be directed to be considered within a time frame.

¶39

Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents 1 to 3.

¶40

W.P.(C)No.12039/12

¶41

-2-

¶42

The learned Government Pleader submitted that two revision petitions cannot be entertained by two different authorities and therefore Exhibit P5 may be directed to be considered by the 2^nd respondent.

¶43

There will be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to take a decision on Exhibit P5 after hearing the necessary parties including the petitioner and 4^th respondent, within a period of six weeks from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition. The selection will be finalised in terms of the decision taken in the revision petition as it is reported that processing of applications alone has been done as of now.

¶44

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

¶45

T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR , JUDGE .

¶46

dsn

Sheena.K. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sheena.K. v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Omana Vs State of Kerala

K.v.Premachandran Vs the State of Kerala

Latha C.Pillai Vs Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi

Anil Kumart.T Vs Sivasankar

Haneefa Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

R. Santhosh Vs the Senior Geologist Kollam