Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

M.K.PRABHAKARAN, WATCHMAN versus STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


M.K.PRABHAKARAN, WATCHMAN v. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS - WP(C) No. 37271 of 2003(K) [2006] RD-KL 4107 (21 December 2006)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 37271 of 2003(K)

1. M.K.PRABHAKARAN, WATCHMAN,
... Petitioner

2. K.SHARMAN, HELPER, D.S.UNIT, COIRFED,

3. V.ANIL, ATTENDER, SHOW ROOM,

4. P.SHYNI, L.D.CLERK, SHOW ROOM,

5. R.PRAKASHAN, HEAD OFFICE,

6. K.SREEDEVI, L.D.CLERK, SHOW ROOM,

7. P.G.REJANI, L.D.CLERK, CHUNGAM DEPOT,

8. N.S.SHIBU, COMPUTER OPERATOR,

9. P.P.KANNA, ATTENDAR, R.C.P.UNIT, COIRFED

10. D.SWAMINATHAN, WATCHMAN, HEAD OFFICE,

11. K.RAMACHANDRAN, WATCHMAN, HEAD OFFICE,

12. P.GOPALAN, WATCHMAN,

Vs

1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY ITS
... Respondent

2. THE DIRECTOR,

3. MANAGING DIRECTOR, COIRFED

For Petitioner :SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.SREEDHARAN NAIR

For Respondent :SRI.A.N.RAJAN BABU

The Hon'ble MR. Justice KURIAN JOSEPH

Dated :21/12/2006

O R D E R

KURIAN JOSEPH, J.

W.P.(C) No.37271 of 2003 Dated 21st December, 2006.

J U D G M E N T

The writ petition is filed mainly with the following prayers :-

(i) "Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction calling for the records leading to Ext.P14 and quash the same; (ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to permit the petitioners to continue as Watchman/Helper/ Attender/ Clerk/ Computer Operator in the service of the third respondent with all service benefits as if Ext.P14 order were never issued." Since Ext.P14 is passed only by the second respondent, it is for the petitioners to approach the Government, particularly since the second respondent has relied on a direction issued by the Government in passing the impugned order. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of as follows :- In the event of the petitioners approaching the Government within two months from today, the matter will be duly considered by the Government with notice to the first two petitioners as the representatives of the rest of the petitioners, and the third respondent and appropriate orders in accordance WP NO.37271/03 2 with law thereon will be passed expeditiously. While passing orders as above, the contention of the petitioners that the judgment in O.P.No.20042/98, based on which the Government issued the direction was set aside by this Court by the judgment in W.A.105/01, will also be taken into consideration by the Government. The interim order dated 26.11.2003 will continue till such time.

KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE.

tgs

KURIAN JOSEPH, J

O.P.No. of 2002

J U D G M E N T

Dated 21st December, 2006.


Copyright

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

Advertisement

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.