IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 4TH APRIL 2008 / 15TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11023 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ FRANCIS VADAKKEL, S/O.THOMAS, AGED 54 YEARS, RESIDING AT VADAKKEL HOUSE, BYSON VALLEY P.O., UDUMPANCHOLA, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.C.K.PAVITHRAN SRI.M.X.XAVIER SRI.K.BAIJU SMT.N.S.SUMI RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI. 4. REJIT GEORGE, S/O.GEORGE, AGED 43 YEARS, RESIDING AT VATTAKUNNEL KIZHAKKEL HOUSE, H.NO.IV/366, SOORYANELLI P.O., UDUMPANCHOLA. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. I.V. PRAMOD. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 11023 OF 2008 K = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 4th April, 2008. J U D G M E N T The subject matter of this writ petition pertains to the appointment of Authorized Wholesale Distributor at Chinnakanal. 2. By Ext. P1, the petitioner was appointed by the District Collector as A.W.D. against which the 4th respondent filed an appeal which was rejected by Ext. P2. Still aggrieved the 4th respondent pursued the matter by filing Ext. P3 revision before the 1st respondent. Petitioner submits that by Ext. P5, the appeal was posted for hearing to 25.3.2008. But, however it was adjourned to 28.3.2008. According to the petitioner, the counsel for the petitioner had inconvenience to appear on that day. The counsel still appeared and sought some more time for getting ready with the matter and arguing the case. The response of the 1st respondent to this request was one of inability to grant further time. In view of this, the writ petition has been filed on the apprehension that final W.P.(C) No. 11023 OF 2008 -2- orders will be passed on Ext. P3 revision denying a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. 3. The learned Govt. Pleader submits that the revision is still pending. Since final order in the revision has not been passed, I think, a reasonable opportunity should be given to the petitioner to argue the matter to their satisfaction. 4. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition directing that the 1st respondent shall dispose of the revision within one month from today and in the meanwhile, the petitioner and the 4th respondent should also be given an opportunity of hearing. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-