High Court Kerala High Court

Yesoda.V. vs Secretary To Government Of Kerala on 3 April, 2009

Kerala High Court
Yesoda.V. vs Secretary To Government Of Kerala on 3 April, 2009
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA.No. 731 of 2009()


1. YESODA.V., ATTENDANT (NOW RETD.)
                      ...  Petitioner
2. T.MOHANAN, ATTENDANT (NOW RETD.)

                        Vs



1. SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
                       ...       Respondent

2. DIRECTOR OF ANIMAL HUSBANDRY DEPARTMENT

3. DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE OF ANIMAL HEALTH

                For Petitioner  :SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS

 Dated :03/04/2009

 O R D E R
                K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR &
                 M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ.
              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                       W.A.No. 731 of 2009
              - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
             Dated this the 3rd day of April, 2009

                             JUDGMENT

Balakrishnan Nair, J.

The appellants are the writ petitioners. They approached

this Court seeking the following reliefs:

“1) Issue a writ of mandamus, or any other

writ, order or direction directing the respondents to

grant the risk allowance as per Exhibit P1 G.O.(P)

480/89/Fin dated 1.11.1989, to the petitioners and

disburse the entire arrears immediately.

2) Issue such other orders or directions which

this Honourable Court deem fit and proper in the

interest of justice.”

2. The learned Single Judge directed the appellants to file a

representation before the Government high lighting their claim

and a direction was issued to the Government to consider that

representation in accordance with law, within a time limit.

Dissatisfied with the above direction issued by the learned Single

Judge, this writ appeal was filed.

W.A.No. 731 of 2009
2

3. We find that the claim of the appellants have already been

considered by the Government and rejected. The said order has not

been challenged in time. However, the learned Single Judge was

liberal beyond the requirement of law and permitted the appellants to

file representation and further directed the Government to consider

that representation. Therefore, the present appeal is unsustainable in

law and it cannot be entertained.

4. This appeal is accordingly dismissed. The appellants may

file representation before the Government, if they have not filed the

same so far, within two weeks from today.

(K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR)
Judge

(M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS)
Judge

tm