High Court of KeralaWP(C)/9857/2015disposed of

Manu v. State Of Kerala

2015-03-31Honourable Mr.Justice P.R.Ramachandra Menon4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MARCH 2015/10TH CHAITHRA, 1937 WP(C).No. 9857 of 2015 (F) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

---------------------- MANU, S/O.CHAKKANAN, THALAVECHAPARAKUDY HOUSE KUTTAMPUZHA VILLAGE, KOTHAMANGALAM TALUK ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.

BY ADVS.SRI.MATHEW JOHN (K) SRI.DOMSON J.VATTAKUZHY RESPONDENTS:-:

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

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT OF DEVELOPMENT OF SCHEDULED CASTE AND SCHEDULES TRIBES, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

2. THE DIRECTOR, SCHEDULED TRIBES DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JOSEPH GEORGE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31-03-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

WP(C).No. 9857 of 2015 (F) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1. A TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER DATED 11.07.2014. EXHIBIT P2. A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION BY THE PETITIONER AND 4 OTHERS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

-------------------------------------------- W.P(C). No. 9857 of 2015 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of March, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following prayers:

"i.

Issue a writ in the nature of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the respondents to take appropriate decision on Ext.P2 representation without any further delay.

ii.

Issue such other writ, direction or order as are just and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case to meet the ends of justice."

The grievance of the petitioner is that, the representation preferred by the petitioner before the 2nd respondent for increasing the amount of grant from `2.5 lakhs, is still to be considered and the delay in this regard is causing much loss and hardships to the petitioner and hence the writ petition. 3.

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well. 4.

Considering the limited extent of relief sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case. The writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2, in accordance

WP(c). No.9857 of 2015 with law. It shall be done, at the earliest, at any rate, within 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for further steps.

Sd/- P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.