IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2009 / 18TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 11907 of 2009(G) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. K.A.RAPHEL ALIAS REPPO, KUMBANAYIL HOUSE, SOUTH CHITTOOR KARAYIL, CHERANALLOOR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 2. VARGHESE REPPO, KUMBANAYIL HOUSE, SOUTH CHITTOOR KARAYIL, CHERANALLOOR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER (I & A), IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. ANU SIVARAMAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.11907 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 8th April,2009 J U D G M E N T The first petitioner is the brother of late Sri.K.Augustine Paily. Second petitioner is the son of 1st petitioner. Late Augustine Paily was a SLR worker working in L.B.C Section under the office of the Assistant Executive Engineer, Irrigation Sub Division No.II, Chalakudy. He died in harness on 3.11.2001 as a bachelor. It appears that he had given the name of his brother Sri. K.A Mathew and the petitioners as his nominees in the service book. It is stated in the writ petition that Sri. K.A Mathew , brother of Augustine Paily left the family house about 50 years back and presently it is known that he died on 1.6.1990 at Chithirapuram in Idukki District. His death is long before the entry in service of Augustine Paily in the Irrigation Department . Petitioners have filed Exhibit-P1 representation seeking for disbursement of benefits to them. W.P ( C) No.11907 of 2009 2 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners prayed that the 2nd respondent may be directed to consider Exhibit-P1 and pass appropriate orders within a time limit. 3. Hence there will be a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider the request made by the petitioner in Exhibit-P1 in accordance with the relevant rules and orders and take appropriate decision thereon and communicate the same to the petitioner within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.11907 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No.11907 of 2009 4