The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous based on the counsel's submission that it had become so, with no substantive reasoning recorded.
The writ petition was dismissed as infructuous.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
TUESDAY, THE 03RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1942
WP(C).No.1168 OF 2015(U)
PETITIONER:
SREENIVASAN NAIR P AGED 40 YEARS CHEMBAKASSERIL HOUSE,PONJASSERY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR
RESPONDENT:
PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PERUMBAVOOR 683542
R1 BY SRI.V.M.KURIAN, SC, PERUMBAVOOR MUNICIPALITY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No. 1168 of 2015
..2..
W.P.(C) No.1168 of 2015
JUDGMENT
The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the writ petition has become infructuous. In the light of the said submission, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.
Sd/P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE
ds 03.11.2020
Sreenivasan Nair P
Perumbavoor Municipality
P.B. Suresh Kumar
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
