IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH DECEMBER 2010 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 36061 of 2010(G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- P.PRATHEESH, S/O.PRADEEP, AGED 34, PATTARUPARAMBIL HOUSE, THAIKKATTUKARA P.O., ALUVA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADVS. SRI.R.MURALEEKRISHNAN, SRI.P.M.MUJEEB REHIMAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------- 1. THE DIRECTOR, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001. 2. THE GENERAL MANAGER, DISTRICT INDUSTRIES CENTRE, PALAKKAD, PIN - 678 014. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRY AND COMMERCE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.P.O, PIN - 695 001. R1 & R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/12/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 36061 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 8th day of December, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was an applicant for allotment of land in Kanjikkode Industrial Development Area. In the rank list that was prepared for allotment for the year 2009, petitioner's name was included at Sl.No.9. Ext.P2 is the ranked list. Although he was not alloted any land, by Ext.P3 memo he was again called for interview for updating the ranked list. It was thereupon that this writ petition was filed contending that in the absence of having alloted the land, there is no reason to have conducted a fresh interview for updating the ranked list. 2. Learned Government Pleader, who has obtained instructions in the matter submits that in 2008, a ranked list was prepared and there were 8 pending applicants. It is stated that while the ranked list was remaining valid, in 2009, another ranked list was prepared, in which the petitioner was included at Sl.No.9. It is stated that while so, the Director of Industries issued directions requiring the subordinates to periodically revise the ranked lists by conducting fresh interview of persons included in WPC No. 36061/10 :2 : the existing ranked lists. It is stated that it was in compliance with the aforesaid direction that memo similar to Ext.P3 were issued to all persons, who are included in the ranked lists of 2008 and 2009 and interviews were held on 3/12/2010. Therefore, it is contended that it was only for the purpose of updating the ranked list that the interview was scheduled, and therefore, there is nothing illegal in what they have done. 3. Thus from the submissions made by the learned Government Pleader, it is obvious that it was only for the purpose of updating and consolidating the existing ranked lists, that Ext.P3 was issued. Evidently, petitioner, like other persons, who are included in the ranked lists of 2008 and 2009 was also issued memos enabling them to appear before the Interview Committee, for inclusion in the ranked list to be prepared. Thus, I do not find that by issuing Ext.P3, any prejudice has been caused to the petitioner or anybody else warranting interference in this writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp