IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 8306 of 2010(K)
1. RENU MOHANDS, W/O.MOHANDAS.G,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
... Respondent
2. SECRETARY,
3. BEVIN SCARIA NINAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.M.S.UNNIKRISHNAN
For Respondent :SRI.GEO PAUL
The Hon'ble MR. Justice ANTONY DOMINIC
Dated :31/03/2010
O R D E R
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
================
W.P.(C) NO. 8306 OF 2010 (K)
=====================
Dated this the 31st day of March, 2010
J U D G M E N T
The challenge in this writ petition is against Ext.P13, an
order passed by the Ombudsman for Local Self Government
Institutions in OP No.1684/2009. According to the petitioner,
Ext.P13 order was passed without hearing her and that although
she had filed Exts.P14 to P17 applications to get herself
impleaded in the proceedings, to keep Ext.P13 in abeyance, to
review Ext.P13 and to advance hearing of the applications, these
applications were not considered and at the same time, action on
the basis of Ext.P13 was being taken. It is on that premise, the
writ petition was filed.
2. When the matter came up for admission on 12.03.2010, having regard to the facts as stated above, this
Court stayed further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P13 order. Now
counsel have entered appearance on behalf of respondents 2 and
3. It is pointed out on behalf of respondents 2 and 3 that but for
the pendency of this writ petition, the Ombudsman itself would
have considered the applications made by the petitioner. It is
WPC No. 8306/10
:2 :
also pointed out that on 23/3/2010, the Ombudsman has closed
the proceedings in view of the pendency of the writ petition with
liberty to the parties to seek its reopening on the disposal of the
writ petition.
3. As already seen, the grievance of the petitioner is
against Ext.P13. She is seeking review of that order and other
necessary orders, for which, she has already filed Exts.P14 to P17
applications before the Ombudsman. Therefore, the grievance of
the petitioner will be redressed if the Ombudsman considers
Exts.P14 to P17 with notice to the parties and pass appropriate
orders in the matter, keeping further proceedings pursuant to
Ext.P13 in abeyance in the meanwhile.
4. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition directing that it
will be open to the petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment
and seek reopening of the proceedings before the Ombudsman.
Once proceedings are re-opened, the Ombudsman will consider
Exts.P14 to P17 applications with notice to the parties and pass
orders thereon. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible.
WPC No. 8306/10
:3 :
It is directed that in the meanwhile, further proceedings
pursuant to Ext.P13 order challenged in this writ petition will be
kept in abeyance.
ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE
Rp