T.A.Jose And Company vs State Of Kerala on 3 September, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 25580 of 2010(V)


1. T.A.JOSE AND COMPANY
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. STATE OF KERALA
                       ...       Respondent

2. COMMISSIONER

3. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

4. DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER

5. KERALA STATE CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION

                For Petitioner  :SRI.K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER

                For Respondent  :SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI

The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC

 Dated :03/09/2010

 O R D E R
                        ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
                   -------------------------
                  W.P.(C.) No.25580 of 2010 (V)
             ---------------------------------
           Dated, this the 3rd day of September, 2010

                           J U D G M E N T

Controversy in this writ petition is in relation to the

appointment as AWD III at Mundoor in Thrissur District. It is seen

that pursuant to the directions of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment

dated 03/03/2009 in WP(C) No.30292/2007, by Ext.P9 order dated

03/08/2010 passed by the Commissioner of Civil Supplies,

appointment of the petitioner was set aside. Against the said order,

invoking the revisional power of the Government, the petitioner filed

Ext.P10 revision before the 1st respondent, along with an application

for stay as well.

2. Having regard to the pendency of the said revision,

which is one filed under Clause 71 of the Rationing Order, 1966, it

is only appropriate that the 1st respondent should hear and dispose

of the said revision with notice to all parties.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that

presently, the Officer, who has passed Ext.P9 order is holding

WP(C) No.25580/2010
-2-

charge as Secretary to Government and therefore, the said Officer

shall not hear the revision. However, learned Government Pleader

pointed out that the said Officer is holding only additional charge.

Since this is a matter to be taken note of by the 1st respondent, I

take note of this contention and leave it to be taken note of by the

1st respondent.

4. Now that Ext.P10 revision filed by the petitioner is

pending before the 1st respondent, the 1st respondent shall dispose

of the revision in the manner as directed above as expeditiously as

possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of

this judgment.

All contentions on the merits including the locus standi of the

additional respondents are left open to be agitated and adjudicated

by the 1st respondent.

This writ petition is disposed of as above.

(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)
jg