IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH FRIDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 4050 of 2009(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.P.SUDARSANAN, S/O.LATE PARAMESWARAN, PROPRIETOR,CYTHANYA INDUSTRIES, RESIDING AT KALLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, MUHAMMA.P.O,THANNEERMUKKAM SOUTH VILLAGE,CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DIST. BY ADV. SRI.N.SUKUMARAN SRI.G.BENO RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE ADDL. DIRECTOR OF INDUSTRIES,DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, ALAPPUZHA. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, CHERTHALA TALUK, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THANNEERMUKKAM SOUTH VILLAGE,ALAPUZHA DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.BEJOY CHANDRAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH, J. -------------------------------------- W.P.C. NO. 4050 OF 2009 F -------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th February, 2009 JUDGMENT Petitioner had approached this Court earlier as evident from Ext.P7 Judgment. By Ext.P7, this Court directed the General Manager to consider the claim for OTS. However, by Ext.P8, the Director has rejected the claim saying that the Scheme was over by 30.9.2008. 2. I heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. Learned Government Pleader on instructions, submits that the application of the petitioner was being considered by the General Manager. The General Manager required certain documents to be produced. Petitioner, thereupon, filed a petition before the Minister. The Minister made it over to the Director. The Director, referring to the Government Order and the petition submitted to the Minister, passed Ext.P8. It is, therefore, clear that a decision has not been taken by the second respondent as directed in Ext.P7. Learned WPC.4050/09 F 2 counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is prepared to produce the documents. The second respondent will intimate the petitioner the documents to be produced and thereupon a decision will be taken on the application of the petitioner which, even according to the learned Government Pleader, has been filed on 30.7.2008. In such circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of with a direction that the second respondent will process the application and it will be open to him to call upon the petitioner to produce such documents as are required in this regard, and that the matter will be brought to an end, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. It is also made clear that the second respondent will take a decision untrammelled by Ext.P8. Till such time as a decision is taken as aforesaid, recovery proceedings against the petitioner will be kept in abeyance. Sd/= kbk. K. M. JOSEPH, JUDGE // True Copy // PS to Judge