IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 10551 of 2011(T) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- S. THULASI BAI, PROPRIETRIX, HOTEL NEELAKANTA, KOVALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SMT.A.K.PREETHA, SRI.ANIL NARAYANAN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION (REGIONAL OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, PIN-695 004. 2. THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND ORGANIZATION (REGIONAL, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM) BHAVISHYA NIDHI BHAVAN, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY THE REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER, PIN-695 004. 3. EDUARD STETLER, PROPRIETOR, SWISS CAFE, KOVALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 527. R1 & R2 BY SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE, ADV. SMT.T.N.GIRIJA, SC, EPF ORGANISATION. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/06/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: rs WP(C).No. 10551 of 2011(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE RENTAL AGREEMENT DATED 21/03/1997. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/11/2000. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REVIEW PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18/10/2001 PASSED BY THE ASSISTANT PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE EMPLOYEES PROVIDENT FUND APPELLATE TRIBUNAL. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 01/11/2010. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE PROPOSAL FOR COVERAGE DATED 26/02/1999. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE rs P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No . 10551 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 14th June , 2011 JUDGMENT When the matter was taken up for consideration on 26.05.2011, there was no representation for the petitioner. Today also there is no representation for the petitioner. It appears that the petitioner is no more interested in the cause of action projected in this writ petition. Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for non prosecution. Sd/- P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd /True copy/ P.A. to Judge