Disposed

Chandrasekharan Pillai v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

Kerala HC25 Jun 2015WP(C)/19076/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner, a watcher appointed by the Travancore Devaswom Board with an amputated leg, filed this writ petition alleging non-implementation of the Persons with Disabilities Act. The court directed the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the petitioner's representation after hearing him within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on the Ext.P3 representation within two months after hearing the petitioner.

Chandrasekharan Pillai Vs the Travancore Devaswom Board — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR

¶4

THURSDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JUNE 2015/4TH ASHADHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).NO. 19076 OF 2015 (H)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI, AGED 40 YEARS S/O.JANARDHANAN PILLAI, MULLASSERIL VEEDU, KUREEPUZHA, KAVANADU P.O., KOLLAM

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.PRATHEESH.P

¶9

SMT.S.SEETHA

¶10

RESPONDENT(S):

¶11

THE TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, TDB BUILDING, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

¶12

THE COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

¶13

ASST. DEVASWOM COMMISSIONER, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD, NANTHANCODE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001

¶14

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER(KOLLAM GROUP), TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD,

¶15

ANANDAVALLEESWARAM, KOLLAM 691012

¶16

BY SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU, SC, TRAVANCORE DEVASWOM BOARD

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-06-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C).NO. 19076 OF 2015 (H)

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶21

EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 26.07.2013

¶22

EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION GIVEN UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 7.3.2015

¶23

EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 19.12.2014

¶24

EXT.P4: THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PETITIONER WITH HIS AMPUTED LEG

¶25

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL

¶26

//TRUE COPY//

¶27

P A TO JUDGE

¶28

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J. ............................................................. W.P.(C).No.19076 of 2015 ............................................................. Dated this the 25^th day of June, 2015

¶29

JUDGMENT

¶30

The petitioner, who was appointed as watcher under Devaswom Board on 09.06.2003, met with an accident that left him under treatment for more than 22 months. It is stated that the right leg of the petitioner was amputated. In the writ petition, the petitioner is aggrieved with the non-implementation of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities, Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act, 1995, in the respondent Devaswom Board. In this connection, he has preferred Ext.P3 representation before the 2^nd respondent and the limited prayer in the writ petition is for a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 representation after hearing the petitioner.

¶31

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel for the respondents.

¶32

On a consideration of the facts and circumstances of the case as also the submissions made across the bar, I dispose the writ petition with a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on

¶33

¶34

W.P.(C).No.19076 of 2015

¶35

Ext.P3 representation preferred by the petitioner, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after hearing the petitioner. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2^nd respondent for further action.

¶36

A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE

¶37

mns

Chandrasekharan Pillai v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Chandrasekharan Pillai v. the Travancore Devaswom Board

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

O.Chandramathi Vs the National Institute of Technology

A.Santhosh Naik Vs the Commissioner, Malabar Devaswom Board

The Manager, Hidayathul Islam English Medium Up School Vs the State of Kerala

Reshma R. Vs the University of Kerala

V.Thasneem Vs the University of Calicut

Dr.Sarala K.R Vs Kerala Agricultural University