IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 27202 of 2010(A)
1. PRASANNAKUMARIAMMA,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER,
3. TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, KUNNATHOOR TALUK,
4. C.G.VIJAYAKUMAR, PUTHU VARATHU VEED,
5. SHAJAHAN, PAMPADAZHITHEKKATHIL,
6. M.SANKARA KURUP, AMBIKA BHAVANAM,
For Petitioner :SRI.SOORANAD S.SREEKUMAR
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :02/09/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO.27202 OF 2010(A)
--------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of September, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner was an applicant for ARD.No.58 for Kunnathur
Taluk in Kollam District, along with respondents 4 to 6. On
conclusion of the selection process, the 4th respondent was
appointed. Against that appointment, petitioner and others filed
appeal which was disposed of by the District Collector setting
aside the appointment and ordering re-notification. This order was
confirmed by the Commissioner and the Government. Now the
petitioner contends that since the order appointing the 4th
respondent has been set aside, instead of re- notification, his
candidature ought to have been considered for appointment.
2. Against the appointment of the 4th respondent, the
petitioner filed an appeal before the District Collector and had
secured an order for re-notification and petitioner did not pursue
the matter thereafter. Therefore, as far as the petitioner is
concerned, with the order of the District Collector, the
proceedings have become final. This order requires re-notification
and therefore the petitioner cannot now seek an order from this
WPC.No. 27202/2010
:2 :
court requiring the respondents to consider his candidature for
appointment. In that view of the matter the relief sought for
cannot be granted.
3. Be that as it may, having regard to the order passed by
the District Collector, which has been confirmed by the
Commissioner and the Government, it is necessary that the
respondents should initiate expeditious action for issuing
notification, which shall be issued, within 4 weeks from the date
of production of a copy of the judgment.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
(ANTONY DOMINIC)
JUDGE
vi/