Geetha Prasad v. The Superintending Engineer
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2015/13TH AGRAHAYANA, 1937 WP(C).No. 25795 of 2015 (Y) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER : - ----------------------- GEETHA PRASAD, PRATHYUSHA, NAMBARATHU JUNCTION, MATHILIL P.O, PERINAD, KOLLAM.
BY ADVS.SRI.A.JAYASANKAR SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SRI.MANU GOVIND RESPONDENTS : - --------------------------
1. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, PH CIRCLE, KOLLAM.
2. THE STATE CO-OPERATIVE BANK, KOLLAM BRANCH REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY BUILDING, ANANDAVALLEESWARAM, KOLLAM -13.
3. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES.
TRIVANDRUM 685 001.
4. THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES. CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM.
R1 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE MATHEW, SC, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY R2 BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM, SC, KERALA STATE CO.OP BANK LTD.
R3 & R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. G. GOPAKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04-12-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 25795 of 2015 (Y) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : - ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1 : COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 24.02.2015 OF THE KERALA LOKAYUTA.
EXHIBIT P2 : COPY OF THE PLAINT DATED 23.05.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 : COPY OF THE INJUNCTION APPLICATION DATED 23.05.2015 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : - --------------------------------------- EXHIBIT R1(a) :
TRUE COPY OF THE SALARY CERTIFICATE DATED 12.07.05. EXHIBIT R2(a) :
TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT OF PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT R2(b) :
TRUE COPY OF THE AWARD DATED OCTOBER 5, 2015 IN ARC No. 534/15.
// TRUE COPY // P.A. TO JUDGE DMR/-
DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.
--------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 25795 of 2015 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 04th day of December, 2015
JUDGMENT
All the learned counsel for the parties concerned in the writ petition have reported that nothing survives in the writ petition. Accordingly, this Court closes the writ petition as having not survived for further consideration. DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-