← Library
High Court of KeralaWA/575/2009dismissed as infructuous

Kavya S. v. State Of Kerala

2015-09-18Honourable The Chief Justice Mr.Ashok Bhushan2 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.ASHOK BHUSHAN & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2015/27TH BHADRA, 1937 WA.No. 575 of 2009 (C) IN WP(C).11393/2008 -------------------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 11393/2008 of HIGH COURT OF KERALA DATED 04-04-2007 APPELLANTS/PETITIONERS:

------------------------------------------

1. KAVYA S., OFFICE ASSISTANT, VEGETABLE AND FRUIT PROMOTION, COUNCIL KERALAM SEED PROCESSING PLANT, ALATHOOR, PALAKKAD.

2. JOYCY C.J, SERVICE ASSISTANT, VEGETABLE AND FRUIT PROMOTION, COUNCIL KERALAM SEED PROCESSING PLANT, ALATHOOR, PALAKKAD.

3. JEENA U., MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT, VEGETABLE AND FRUIT PROMOTION, COUNCIL KERALAM SEED PROCESSING PLANT, ALATHOOR, PALAKKAD.

4. BINOY GEORGE, OFFICE ASSISTANT, VEGETABLE AND FRUIT PROMOTION, COUNCIL KERALAM SEED PROCESSING PLANT, ALATHOOR, PALAKKAD.

5. PRATHEESH C., SERVICE ASSISTANT, VEGETABLE AND FRUIT PROMOTION COUNIL KERALAM MYTHRI BHAVAN, NEAR DOORDARSHAN KENDRA, KAKKANAD KOCHI-37.

BY ADV. SRI.S.RADHAKRISHNAN RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS:

---------------------------------------------

1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT.

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

2. VEGETABLE AND FRUIT PROMOTION COUNCIL KERALAM, REP. BY ITS CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER MYTHRI BHAVAN, NEAR DOORDARSHAN KENDRA, KAKKANAD KOCHI-682 037.

R2 BY ADV. SRI.N.SUGATHAN,SC,VEGE.& FRUITS PROMOTION COUNCIL R2 BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PRASANTH, SC, VEGETABLES & FRUITS PROMOTION COUNCIL R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18-09-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: JJJ

ASHOK BHUSHAN, C.J.

& K. VINOD CHANDRAN, J.

------------------------------------------ W.A. No. 575 of 2009 ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 18th day of September, 2015

J U D G M E N T

Ashok Bhushan, C.J.

The learned counsel for the respondent submits that during the pendency of the appeal the writ petitioners have already been absorbed. Hence, the Writ Appeal has become infructuous.

2.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellants also, who does not dispute the aforesaid deposition. 3.

In view of the above submission, the Writ Appeal is dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/- ASHOK BHUSHAN, CHIEF JUSTICE.

Sd/- K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE jjj/18.9