Dismissed

Mohammed Ashraf v. the Director, Kerala State It Mission and Akshaya

Kerala HC12 Aug 2022WP(C)/37795/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition where the petitioner's Akshaya Centre license was suspended. The Court directed the Director of Kerala State IT Mission to consider the petitioner's representation and take a decision after affording him an opportunity of hearing within two months.

What did the court decide?

The 1st respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation and take a decision after affording an opportunity of hearing within two months.

Mohammed Ashraf Vs the Director, Kerala State… — Pension and Retirement Benefits | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 12^TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 21ST SRAVANA, 1944 WP(C) NO. 37795 OF 2016

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

MOHAMMED ASHRAF SWALATH MANZILPACHAMBLA P.O, ICHILAMKODE,KASARAGOD BY ADV SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 THE DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE IT MISSION AND AKSHAYA VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 005

¶9

2 THE DISTRICT PROJECT MANAGER AKSHAYA DISTRICT PROJECT OFFICEKASARAGOD 673 121

¶10

3 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KASARAGOD DISTRICT 673 121

¶11

*4 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KUMBLA POLICE STATION,KASARAGODE-671321

¶12

***(IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED03.02.2020 IN IA 1/2019)**

¶13

BY ADV. RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON

¶15

12.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO.37795 OF 2016

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

Dated this the 12^th day of August, 2022

¶20

The petitioner was conducting an Akshaya

¶21

Centre. According to him, on the basis of some forged documents circulated within Mangalpady Grama Panchayath, a crime was registered against him and he was remanded to custody for some days. In view of the registration of crime and remand, the 2^nd respondent suspended the petitioner’s license for conducting the Akshaya Centre. Aggrieved, the petitioner preferred Ext.P4 representation before the 1^st respondent.

¶22

Learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that, going by the counter affidavit of the 3^rd respondent, the only reason for not taking a decision on the petitioner’s representation is the pendency of this writ petition.

¶23

Learned Government Pleader submitted

¶24

that the 1^st respondent is willing to take a decision

¶25

WP(C) NO.37795 OF 2016

¶26

¶27

in the matter in accordance with law.

¶28

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of, directing the 1^st respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation and take an appropriate decision thereon, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. The decision, as directed above, shall be taken within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN

JUDGE

NB/12-8

WP(C) NO.37795 OF 2016

¶34

¶35

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 37795/2016

¶36

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P 1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF AKSHAYA ENTREPRENEURSHIP ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P 2 TRUE COPY OF THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT EXHIBIT P 3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 26-09-2016 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P 4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATIONS SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE FINAL REPORT IN CR NO. 537/2016.

¶37

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL

¶38

TRUE COPY

¶39

P.A. TO JUDGE

Mohammed Ashraf v. the Director, Kerala State It Mission and Akshaya

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohammed Ashraf v. the Director, Kerala State It Mission and Akshaya

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

Adv. a. M. Ariff Vs the Union of India

K.K.Sugathan Vs Punarjani Securities Limited

Dr.a.Ashokan Vs State of Kerala

Dr.Sreedev T.S Vs State of Kerala

Cheerans Structurals, Vs Micro and Micro and Small Enterprises Facilitation Council

Anu Babu Vs Kerala State Coastal Area Development Corporation