IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY, 2011/7TH MAGHA,1933. WP(C).No. 36018 of 2008(K) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MOLLY DEVASSY, W/O.V.P.DEVASSY,RESIDING AT VILIKUDOM HOUSE, KUTTIKAD,PERIYARAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, TRICHUR DISTRICT. 2. V.P.DEVASSY, S/O.POULOSE, RESIDING AT VILIKUDOM HOUSE, KUTTIKAD, PARIYARAM VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, TRICHUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SHIBU PUDUSSERY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARAITE, THIRUVAANANTHAPURAM 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, AYYANTHOLE, TRICHUR. 3. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR(RR), MUKUNDAPURM TALUK, CIVIL STATION, IRINJALAKUDA. 4. DISTRICT LABOUR OFFICER, AYYANTHOLE, TRICHUR. 5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PARIYARAM VILLAGE, PARIYARAM(POST). GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21.1.2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 36018 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 14th October, 2009. J U D G M E N T This writ petition was dismissed for default on 19-1-2009. M.J.C.No. 90/2009 was allowed on 27-3-2009. The matter came up again on 9-2-2009, on which date, an interim order for a period of one month was granted. The matter again came up on 12-10-2009, on which date, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Accordingly, the same was posted to today. When the matter was taken up today, there is no representation for the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for default. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [True copy] P.S to Judge. S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 36018 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 21st January, 2011. J U D G M E N This writ petition comes up for hearing after an order dated 18.11.2009 in M.J.C.No. 491/2009 restoring the writ petition to file, which was dismissed for default, which order reads as follows and is self-explanatory: “This is an application to restore the writ petition to file, which was dismissed for default on 14-10-2009 by the following judgment: “This writ petition was dismissed for default on 19-1-2009. M.J.C.No. 90/2009 was allowed on 27-3-2009. The matter came up again on 9-2-2009, on which date, an interim order for a period of one month was granted. The matter again came up on 12-10-2009, on which date, there was no representation on behalf of the petitioners. Accordingly, the same was posted to today. When the matter was taken up today, there is no representation for the petitioners. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed for default.” In view of the above circumstances, the explanation given in the affidavit accompanying the M.J.C cannot be accepted on face value. However, taking a lenient view, I allow the M.J.C on condition that the petitioners pay Rs. 1500/- as costs to the Kerala Mediation Center within two weeks and produce proof of payment, failing which the M.J.C would stand dismissed. Post after two weeks.” After that order , the writ petition came up for hearing to several dates. On 18.8.2010, there was no representation for the petitioner and therefore it was posted to the next day. But, it came up again only on 11.10.2010, on which date, it was posted after a week. This writ petition has been in the hearing list of this Court for the past 21 days now. Today, when the matter was taken up, there is no representation on behalf of the petitioner. The petitioner is also absent. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is again dismissed for default. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.