Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS versus V.LEELA W/O. LATE P.V. RAGHAVAN

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS v. V.LEELA W/O. LATE P.V. RAGHAVAN - WA No. 486 of 2003 [2007] RD-KL 12085 (4 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 486 of 2003()

1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS
... Petitioner

2. THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

3. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, NENMARA.

Vs

1. V.LEELA W/O. LATE P.V. RAGHAVAN,
... Respondent

For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

For Respondent :SRI.S.D.ASOKAN

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :04/07/2007

O R D E R

H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.T.SANKARAN, J.

W.A.Nos.486 & 499 of 2003

Dated, this the 4th day of July, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L.Dattu, C.J. These appeals arise out of an order passed by the learned Single Judge in O.P.No.30224 of 2002 connected with O.P.No.20508 of 2002. In O.P.No. 30224 of 2002, the petitioner had called in question the order passed by the State Government (Ext.P17) dated 20.5.2002. One M/s.Joseph & Company had also questioned the said order passed by the State Government (G.O. (Ms) No.3/2002/F&WLD dated 20.5.2002) in O.P.No.20508 of 2002. The learned Single Judge had disposed of the writ petitions. Aggrieved by the said order, M/s.Joseph & Company were before this Court in W.A.No.296 of 2003. Against the same judgment the State had also filed W.A.No.255 of 2003. A Division Bench of this Court by its orders dated 7th April, 2004, had dismissed those writ appeals.

2. Aggrieved by the said order, the State Government had carried the matter to the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.4169 of 2004.

3. We are informed that the apex Court has allowed the Civil Appeal and has remanded the matter to the State Government to redo the matter in accordance with law and in the light of the observations made by the Supreme Court in the said Civil Appeal. We are also informed that after the disposal of the Civil Appeal, the State Government has passed a fresh order on 26.11.2004. Aggrieved by that, the parties are before this Court in another writ petition.

4. In O.P.Nos.30224 of 2002 and 20508 of 2002, the petitioners called W.A.Nos.486 & 499/2003 2 in question the very same order passed by the State Government dated 20.5.2002. In view of the orders now passed by the Supreme Court in Civil Appeal No.4169 of 2004, the reliefs sought for in these writ appeals would not survive for consideration of this Court at this stage. Accordingly, they are disposed of as unnecessary.

5. In view of the order passed in the writ appeals, the relief sought in C.M.P.Nos.1556 and 1589 of 2003 need not be considered by this Court. Accordingly, the said C.M.Ps. are also rejected. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.T.SANKARAN)

JUDGE

vns


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.