IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 30360 of 2010(T)
1. MANIKUTTY.S., W/O.K.G.SREEKUMAR,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. KERALA STATE INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR, AKSHAYA,
3. ASSISTANT DISTRICT COORDINATOR,
4. AROO GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
For Petitioner :SRI.R.PREMCHAND
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :04/10/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 30360 OF 2010 (T)
=====================
Dated this the 4th day of October, 2010
J U D G M E N T
Petitioner states that she is entrusted an Akshaya Center
based on Ext.P3, a MOU between the petitioner and the 1st
respondent. It is stated that Clause 17(C) of Ext.P3 provides that
in case the petitioner is unable to run the Akshaya Center for the
reasons mentioned therein, petitioner can either transfer the
centre or execute a power of attorney in favour of any other
person.
2. It is stated that petitioner got an employment and
therefore wants to execute a power of attorney in favour of her
husband. It is also her case that the 4th respondent has already
approved the said request and that Ext.P4 application made to
the 1st respondent in this behalf is pending without orders of the
said respondent. It is complaining of delay on the part of the 1st
respondent in taking a decision on Ext.P4, the writ petition is filed.
3. If as stated by the petitioner, her case is covered by
Clause 17(C) of Ext.P3 Memorandum of Understanding between
the petitioner and the 1st respondent, necessarily the 1st
WPC No. 30360/10
:2 :
respondent is to take a decision on Ext.P4. Having regard to the
case of the petitioner about the pendency of Ext.P4, I direct the 1st
respondent to consider the matter and take a decision. This the
1st respondent shall do within 4 weeks of production of a copy of
this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp