IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 11TH JUNE 2010 / 21ST JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 21874 of 2009(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SOPHIAMMA JUSTIN, MULLENKUZHYIL HOUSE,MALAKUNNAM PO, KURICHY VILLAGE,CHENGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.O.D.SIVADAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, KOTTAYAM 2. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER CHENGANACHERRY. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI.K.RAMESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 11/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 21874/09. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD.16.5.2000. P2. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).No. 11217/04. P3. COPY OF THE APPLICATION DTD.2.4.09. P4. COPY OF THE SOLVENCY CERTIFICATE. P5. COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DTD.5.3.09. P6. COPY OF THE ORDER OF R2 DTD.27.6.09. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 21874 of 2009 ================== Dated this the 11th day of June, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner claims to be the legal heir of late Sri.Abraham who was the licensee of an ARD. According to the petitioner, by virtue of Clause 45(2) of the Kerala Rationing Order, the petitioner is entitled to be appointed as the ARD in the place of her deceased father. The petitioner has filed Ext.P1 application in respect of the same, which was followed up by Ext.P3 application. The petitioner seeks a direction to the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P1 and P3 expeditiously. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. 3. The learned Government Pleader raises a contention that in view of the the Division Bench decision in W.A.No.1217/2009, the application cannot be considered. I am of opinion that whether it can be granted or not, the petitioner is entitled to have her application considered in accordance with law. Therefore, I direct the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P1 and P3, in accordance with law, and communicate the decision to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2