IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN FRIDAY, THE 31ST DECEMBER 2010 / 10TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 38725 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. KIRATHAN NAMBOOTHIRI E.V., EDAMANA VELUTHEDATH MANA, VELAPPAYA, CHINA BAZAR, THRISSUR-680 596. 2. SOUDAMINI,W/O.KIRATHAN NAMBOOTHIRI E.V., EDAMANA VELUTHEDATH MANA, VELAPPAYA, CHINA BAZAR, THRISSUR-680 596. BY ADV. SRI.A.S.P.KURUP SRI.SADCHITH.P.KURUP RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT SOCIAL WELFARE OFFICER, THRISSUR. - 680001 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THRISSUR. - 680020 SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/12/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.SURENDRAMOHAN, J. --------------------------------------- WP (C) No. 38725 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 31st day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioners have filed this writ petition complaining that Ext.P1 notice had been issued to them directing them to appear for a hearing before the local level committee in connection with the consideration of some application that was pending consideration of the said authority. According to the petitioners they have neither been served with a copy of the application that was being considered by the committee, nor informed about the identity of the person who had submitted the application. Without knowing any of the details about the application that was under consideration of the local committee, it was not possible for them to effectively participate in the hearing. According to the petitioners they were under the impression that, copies of the relevant documents would be given to them at the time of hearing on 23.12.2010. Therefore they appeared for the hearing and orders have been reserved. The petitioners WP (C) No. 38725 of 2010 2 requested for a further opportunity to place their objections before the committee. 2. The learned Government Pleader opposes the prayer and submits that since the hearing is already over and what remains is only the passing of the final order, there are no grounds to interfere with the proceedings at this stage. For the above reason it is submitted that this writ petition is devoid of merits. 3. Though admittedly Ext.P1 was received by the petitioners on 21.12.2010, no records are produced to show that the petitioners had tried to obtain a copy of the application that was the subject matter of Ext.P1. On fails to understand why the petitioners did not approach the authority seeking a copy of application, if the contention of the petitioners is true. As matters stand, they have participated in the hearing without obtaining even a copy of the application. At present, the hearing is over and the matter is pending orders. Therefore I do not find any justification to interfere with the said proceedings at this WP (C) No. 38725 of 2010 3 stage. 4. The petitioners are free to raise all the above contentions, while challenging the final order that is likely to be passed in the matter. Reserving the above right of the petitioners, this writ petition is dismissed. K.SURENDRAMOHAN, JUDGE. rkc