IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI FRIDAY, THE 23RD MAY 2008 / 2ND JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 15239 of 2008 (S) ----------------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ SRI.V.THANKACHAN MATHUNNI GEEVARGHESE, PARAVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, KAILASAPARA, NEDUMKANDOM, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.K.A.SALIL NARAYANAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, COLLECTORATE, P.O.PAINAVU, IDUKKI. 3. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, UDUMBANCHOLA, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON THE 23/05/2008, COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & M.C. HARI RANI, J. ------------------------------------------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.15239 of 2008-S ------------------------------------------------------- Dated, this the 23rd day of May, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. The residents of a labour colony in Kailasapara is before us in this Public Interest Litigation, inter alia seeking a direction to the respondents to appoint an Authorised Retail Distributor at a place which is nearer to their locality. (2). Before approaching this Court, the petitioner has filed a representation dated 10-5-2008. Even before the authorities could act upon the representation so filed, the petitioner has rushed to this Court for the aforesaid relief. (3). In our opinion, the writ petition filed by the petitioner is premature. (4). In the instant case, the petitioner is requesting a writ in the nature of mandamus to the respondents. For granting a prayer for mandamus, there must be a demand for performing the act sought to be enforced and a refusal to perform it or if there is inordinate delay in considering the request. This principle has some exception in certain cases. (5). In the instant case, as we have already noticed, the representation filed by the petitioner is dated 10-5-2008. The authorities do require some breathing time to consider the request made in the representation. We cannot expect the authorities to act so swiftly and WPC 15239/2008 -2- answer the representation filed by the petitioner. In that view of the matter, for the present, we decline to entertain this writ petition. Accordingly, the writ petition is rejected. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner to approach this Court, if need arises in future. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (M.C.HARI RANI) JUDGE MS/dk.