IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON MONDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5729 of 2010(M) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- VASUDEVAN NAIR,AGED 69 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR,"SANDYA BHAVANAM", KALLUVARAMPU,POOVATHOOR.P.O,NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.HARISH KUMAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATIVE SOCIETIES OFFICE OF THE REGISTRAR,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. PALODE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD NO.T.862, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,PALODE PACHA.P.O, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SALE OFFICER/RECOVELRY OFFICER, PALODE,CO-OPERASTIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK LTD.NO.T.862,PALODE, PACHA.P.O,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE REGIONAL MANAGER,KERALA STATE CO-OPERATIVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT BANK,REGIONAL OFFICE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.S.MUHAMMED HASHIM THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J --------------------------- W.P(C) No. 5729 of 2010-M ---------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of February, 2010. J U D G M E N T The specific case projected by the petitioner in this Writ Petition is that, in spite of the specific direction given by this Court vide Ext.P3 judgment to serve a copy of the statement within two weeks, the same is yet to be served to the petitioner and that the petitioner has already filed Ext.P4 representation before the second respondent. The petitioner is also seeking for the benefit of Ext.P5 Circular and that the grievance is now projected in the Writ Petition has also been projected in Ext.P7 representation before the first respondent. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner will be satisfied if appropriate direction is given to the first respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 at the earliest. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent, as well as the learned standing counsel on behalf of the fourth respondent. W.P(C) No. 5729 of 2010-M 2 4. Considering the nature of the limited relief pressed before this Court and also as proposed to be given, this Court does not find it necessary to issue separate notice to the second respondent, for the time being. 5. In the said circumstances, the first respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P7 representation in accordance with law, of course, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and others concerned. The matter shall be finalized as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The Writ Petition is disposed of. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON JUDGE ab