IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2010 / 20TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 22459 of 2010(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- UNNIKRISHNAN.M.R, AGED 31, S/O.M.P.RAMACHANDRAN, DISNEY LAND, H.NO.11/2832, PALLICHAL ROAD, PARRY JUNCTION, THOPPUMPADY, COCHIN-5. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SMT.K.M.RAMYA SRI.P.K.RAKESH KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA TO BE REP. BY SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SECRETARY, COCHIN CORPORATION, ERNAKULAM. MR.ARAVIND KUMAR BABU, GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.S.RAMESH BABU, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.22459 of 2010 (F) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 11th day of August, 2010 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner, he is entitled for appointment under the dying in harness category on account of the death of his father Shri.M.P.Ramachandran. It is stated that his father was a contingent worker in the Cochin Corporation and that while in service, he expired on 12/03/2008. According to the petitioner, claiming employment under the dying in harness category, he submitted Ext.P1 application to the 1st respondent. It is stated that thereafter he received Ext.P3 letter from the District Collector requiring him to submit additional documents and that thereupon, additional documents were also submitted. It is complained that in spite of all the above, orders have not been passed on Ext.P1 application. It is complaining of delay in passing orders on Ext.P1 application, the writ petition has been filed. 2. Going by the pleadings in the writ petition, it is seen that Ext.P1 application was submitted by the petitioner as early as in WP(C) No.22459/2010 -2- July, 2008. If as stated by the petitioner, additional documents required were also produced subsequent to Ext.P1, there is no reason why the 1st respondent shall not consider Ext.P1 application in the light of the documents so produced. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition with the following directions :- That if Ext.P1 application received from the petitioner is still pending, the 1st respondent shall consider the same and pass orders thereon. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three months of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg