IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WA.No. 2819 of 2009()
1. V. RAJEEV, PROPRIETOR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
3. THE KERALA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES
4. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR,
For Petitioner :SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN (SR.)
For Respondent :SRI.E.K.NANDAKUMAR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN
Dated :04/01/2010
O R D E R
P.R. RAMAN & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = == = = = =
W.A. NO. 2819 OF 2009
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
DATED THIS, THE 4TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2010.
J U D G M E N T
Raman, J.
Pursuant to Ext.P5, petitioner preferred Ext.P7 before the
Government, which is still pending. In the meantime, notice was issued
for eviction as per Ext.P8. Hence the petitioner approached this Court
by filing W.P.(C) 32270/2009, inter alia contending that in one way or
other, the representation Ext.P7 ought to have been disposed of before
taking action as is done by Ext.P8. Learned single Judge, however,
found that there was no direction in Ext.P5 judgment to dispose of the
representation, if any, filed and hence declined to grant any relief.
2. We have heard the parties. When this Court made an
observation that if the petitioner wants to purchase the property, he can
approach the Government and he having approached the Government by
filing Ext.P7, it is only proper that Ext.P7 be disposed of in accordance
with law before proceeding with Ext.P8. Ext.P8 shall be kept in
abeyance till such time Ext.P7 is disposed of, which will be done at any
WA 2819/2009
2
rate, within a period of six weeks after hearing all the parties. However, we
are not expressing any opinion on the merits of the representation Ext.P7.
The writ appeal is disposed of .
P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE.
P.S. GOPINATHAN, JUDGE.
KNC/-