Two-judge bench dismissed the writ appeal, holding that correcting factual errors requires a review petition, not a writ appeal, affirming the lower court's final disposal of the underlying petition with reserved rights.
The writ appeal was dismissed.
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 A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MOHAMMED NIAS C.P.
TUESDAY, THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA, 1943
WA NO. 1593 OF 2021
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.10.2021 IN WP(C) 23303/2021 APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
SUNIL KUMAR M.G. AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.V.GOPALAPANICKER, SOORYAKANTHI, KAROOR, CHEENATHAMPARAMBU, AMBALAPPUZHA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, PIN-688561
BY ADV SRI.B.PRAMOD
RESPONDENTS/RRESPONDENTS:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CO-OPERATIVE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001
2. THE DIRECTOR, CO-OPERATIVE ACADEMY OF PROFESSIONAL EDUCATION (CAPE)VIKAS BHAVAN, CO-BANK TOWERS, 1ST FLOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033
THE PRINCIPAL, COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING AND MANAGEMENT STUDIES PUNNAPRA (CEMP) PUNNAPPRA P.O., ALAPPUZHA 688003
BY ADVS: SRI. A J VARGHESE SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.SASINDRAN, SC
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
30.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
:2:
W.A.NO.1593 of 2021
JUDGMENT
A.K.Jayasankaran Nambiar, J.
The petitioner in W.P(C).No23303 of 2021 is the appellant before us, aggrieved by the judgment dated 27.10.2021 of the learned Single Judge. We note that, by the impugned judgment, the learned Single Judge had permitted the Writ Petition to be withdrawn without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move a representation before the 2nd respondent. Before us, it is the submission of the learned counsel for the appellant that no such submission for withdrawal of the Writ Petition was made before the learned Single Judge, and hence, the recording of that fact in the impugned judgment is a mistake.
:3:
W.A.NO.1593 of 2021
representation before the 2nd respondent within a week from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Then, the 2nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on the same within a further period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The Writ Appeal is disposed as above.
Sd/- A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE
Sd/-
MOHAMMED NIAS C.P. JUDGE
mns
:4:
W.A.NO.1593 of 2021
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS ANNEXURE
ANNEXURE A1: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 08.11.2021 ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
2 issues framed by the court
Whether this court can interfere with the single judge's observation regarding the petitioner's right to move a representation.
Whether the single judge's judgment permitting withdrawal of writ petition without prejudice to the right to move representation requires interference.
Sunil Kumar M.G.
State of Kerala
The Director, Co-operative Academy of Professional Education (CAPE)
The Principal, College of Engineering and Management Studies Punnapra
A.K. Jayasankaran Nambiar
Mohammed Nias C.P.
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
