Appeal against the closing of a writ petition by the High Court single Judge. The Division Bench held that the case on merits was not examined and remitted the matter to the single Judge, reviving the writ petition.
Writ appeal allowed; matter remitted to the learned single Judge to decide the case on merits and the writ petition revived.
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 THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. A.J.DESAI
&
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN
THURSDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 27TH ASWINA, 1945
WA NO. 1785 OF 2023
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 8302/2016 OF HIGH COURT OF
KERALA
APPELLANT/PETITIONER:
K.K. MUJEEB
AGED 57 YEARS, S/O ABDUL MAJEED, RESIDING AT
BAITHUL SAFA, ANAYIDUCK, KANNUR, PIN – 670 012.
BY ADVS.
ABDUL RAOOF PALLIPATH
K.R.AVINASH (KUNNATH)
RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DEPUTY LABOUR OFFICERKANNUR PADANAPALAM, KANNUR, PIN – 670 001
2 THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, LABOUR DEPARTMENT, TRIVANDRUM, PIN - 695 001BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.P.HARISH
THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19.10.2023,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.A.No.1785 of 2023
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 19th day of October 2023
A.J. Desai, C.J.
The challenge in this appeal is against the judgment of the learned single Judge dated 03.08.2023 in W.P.(C)No.8302 of 2016, which reads as under:
“Concededly, order Ext.P8 is assailable in appeal under Rule 14 of the Kerala Building and Other Construction Workers Welfare Cess Rules, 1998. Petitioner is relegated to avail such remedy by seeking condonation of the period in pursuing wrong remedy before this Court.
With the aforesaid observation, writ petition is ordered to be closed. Pending interlocutory applications, if any, in the writ petition would stand dismissed.”
should have decided the case on merits, since the writ petition was admitted and an interim order was passed on 04.03.2016. Moreover, the appellant has deposited an amount of Rupees three lakhs as per the interim direction and the writ petition has been pending for more than seven years.
W.A.No.1785 of 2023
3
learned single Judge to decide the case on merits. The writ petition will stand revived. The respondent authority shall file counter affidavit, if any, within a period of four weeks from today.
The writ appeal is allowed as above.
Pending interlocutory applications, if any, shall stand
closed.
Sd/-
A.J. Desai
Chief Justice
Sd/-
V.G. Arun Judge
vpv
//true copy//
P.A. to Judge
W.A.No.1785 of 2023
4
APPENDIX OF WA 1785/2023
PETITIONER ANNEXURES
Annexure 1A TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER DATED
04.03.2016 IN WP(C) NO. 8302/2016.
Annexure 2A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED
17.03.2016.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the single Judge should have decided the writ petition on merits given the long pendency and deposit by the appellant.
K.K. Mujeeb
Deputy Labour Officer, Kannur
State of Kerala
A.J. Desai
V.G. Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court