Petitioner sought to withdraw writ petition challenging disciplinary orders without prejudice. Court dismissed the writ petition as withdrawn with the petitioner reserving rights.
Writ petition dismissed as withdrawn; rights to challenge lower orders reserved.
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 SUNIL THOMAS
FRIDAY, THE 5TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 14TH KARTHIKA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 18980 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:
S.UNNIKRISHNAN NAIR AGED 56 YEARS T.C. 53/1761(1), AAROOS, SANTHIVILA, NEMOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 020.
BY ADVS. M.A.THOMAS KUTTY ASHA CHERIAN CHERIAN CHACKO MANAYATH
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR, VYDYUTHI BHAVANAM, PATTOM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.
T.M.R. DIVISION, KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD LIMITED, THIRUMALA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 032.
BY ADV A.G.ANEETHA
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
2
WP(C) NO. 18980 OF 2021
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this court stating that pursuant to Ext.P1, he has preferred Ext.P2 appeal and Ext.P3 petition is to condone the delay in preferring the appeal. However, no orders have been passed yet. When the matter came up for hearing on last occasion, it was directed to verify whether final orders have been passed on Exts.P2 and P3 and that it shall be disposed as expeditiously as possible. It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that pursuant to the above directions, the order has been pronounced allowing Ext.P3 application to condone the delay, but rejecting Ext.P2 appeal. The learned counsel submitted that he proposes to challenge the order rejecting Ext.P2 and Ext.P1. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought permission to withdraw the writ petition without prejudice to his right. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn, reserving the right of the petitioner to seek his appropriate
3
WP(C) NO. 18980 OF 2021
relief in accordance with law assailing Ext.P1 and the order
rejecting Ext.P2 appeal.
Writ Petition is dismissed as withdrawn, as above.
Sd/-
SUNIL THOMAS, JUDGE
R.AV
WP(C) NO. 18980 OF 2021 4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18980/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.EB 4/TMR/DISCIPLINARY PROCEEDINGS/202021/714 DATED 28.12.2020 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL PETITION DATED 1.6.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 4.9.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
S.Unnikrishnan Nair
Kerala State Electricity Board Limited
Sunil Thomas
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
