IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 3350 of 2010(P)
1. P.ZAKIR HUSSAIN, S/O.ABDULLA HAJI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY
... Respondent
2. DIRECTOR OF PROSECUTION,
3. SHAFEEQUE RAHMAN,
4. O.N.CHANDRAN,
5. C.K.KRISHNANKUTTY,
6. P.R.MUHAMMED NAJEEB,
7. BABURAJ PARAMEL,
For Petitioner :SRI.SAJU.S.A
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.T.RAVIKUMAR
Dated :02/02/2010
O R D E R
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
--------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 3350OF 2010
--------------------------------------------
Dated this the 2nd day of February, 2010
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is working as Assistant Public Prosecutor Grade II
under the first respondent. As per Ext.P1, a final seniority list of Deputy
Directors of Prosecution /Assistant Public Prosecutors of the Kerala State
as on 31.12.2004 was published. The petitioner as per Ext.P2, submitted
his objections to Ext.P1. In fact, it is a petition to review Ext.P1 seniority
list. Subsequently, he submitted Ext.P3 as a reminder to Ext.P2. The
grievance of the petitioner is that though Exts.P2 and P3 are submitted
before the first respondent, so far no action has been taken thereon.
2. There is no dispute as to the competency of the first respondent to
look into the grievance of the petitioner. When an authority is called upon
to consider a matter that falls within its jurisdiction, there is no reason to
disuse the power vested in it. In fact, the first respondent is clothed with
the power and in exercise of that power, he is called upon to look into the
grievance of the petitioner. In the circumstances, the first respondent is
W.P.(C)NO. 3350/2010 2
directed to consider and pass orders on Exts.P2 and P3 as expeditiously
as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.
(C.T. RAVIKUMAR, JUDGE)
sp/
W.P.(C)NO. 3350/2010 3
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
W.P.(C) NO. 3350/2010
JUDGMENT
2nd February, 2010
W.P.(C)NO. 3350/2010 4