Disposed

The Chairman/Managing Director v. P.I.Sreedharan

Kerala HC19 Aug 2016RP/676/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this review petition challenging a writ judgment, the High Court held that an order applicable only to society employees confined the direction to the second petitioner. The review was closed with the direction limited to the second petitioner, leaving the first petitioner's rights open.

What did the court decide?

Review petition closed; direction limited to second petitioner only; first petitioner's rights left open.

The Chairman/Managing Director Vs P.I.Sreedharan — Cooperative Societies | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF AUGUST 2016/28TH SRAVANA, 1938

¶5

RP.No. 676 of 2016

¶6

AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN W.P(C).NO.17566/2016, DATED 15-07-2016

¶7

REVIEW PETITIONER(S)/1ST RESPONDENT :

¶8

THE CHAIRMAN/MANAGING DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE HOSPITAL COMPLEX AND CENTRE FOR ADVANCED MEDICAL SERVICES LTD. NO. 4386, PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE, PARIYARAM - 686 021, KANNUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SMT.BINDUMOL JOSEPH SRI.B.S.SYAMANTHAK

¶10

RESPONDENT(S)/PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENT NO.2 :

¶11

P.I.SREEDHARAN S/O.T.A.RAMAN NAMBIAR, AGED 50 YEARS, THEEYANCHERIANGEVEEDU, P.O.ANCHAMPEEDIKA, VIA. MOTTAMMEL, KANNUR DISTRICT, (GENERAL SECRETARY, PARIYARAM MEDICAL COLLEGE STAFF ASSOCIATION), PIN - 670 331.

¶12

MOLYKUTTY THOMAS, AGED 50 YEARS, D/O. THOMAS, CHUKKANANIL, EDAKKOM P.O., KANNUR DISTRICT - 670 335, SECRETARY, KERALA CO-OPERATIVE WORKERS' FEDERATION)

¶13

THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETY, KANNUR - 670 001.

¶14

R1 & R2 BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN R3 BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.S.SHEEJA

¶15

THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19-08-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

Msd.

¶17

SHAJI P. CHALY, J

¶18

R.P.No.676 OF 2016 in W.P.(C)NO.17566 OF 2016

¶19

Dated this the 19^th day of August, 2016

¶20

O R D E R

¶21

This review petition is filed by the first respondent seeking to review the judgment in respect of a direction granted in favour of the first petitioner in the writ petition, since the first petitioner is not an employee of the first respondent society in the writ petition.

¶22

Heard respective parties. It is evident from

¶23

Ext.P6 order, the implementation of which is sought for by the petitioners, it is applicable only to the employees of the first respondent society in the writ petition. In that view of the matter, direction issued by me in the judgment in W.P.(C)No.17566 of 2016, will confine to the second petitioner alone. With the

¶24

above modification, the review petition is closed. The

¶25

R.P.No.676 OF 2016 in W.P.(C)NO.17566 OF 2016 2

¶26

rights of the first petitioner in the writ petition is left

¶27

open and I am not expressing anything on merits with respect to the claim of the first petitioner in the writ petition.

¶28

sd/-

¶29

SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE

¶30

R.AV

The Chairman/Managing Director v. P.I.Sreedharan

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

The Chairman/Managing Director v. P.I.Sreedharan

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

A.K.Thajudeen Vs the Regional Transport Authority

Joseph Thomas Vs Assistant Registrar of Co-Operative Societies (General)

M.a.Kharim Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Rasiya Vs Lasitha

Kollam Royal Park Hotel & Resorts Pvt.Ltd. Vs the State of Kerala

P.B. Sajeev Vs State of Kerala