IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE K.HEMA FRIDAY, THE 18TH JANUARY 2008 / 28TH POUSHA 1929 WA.No. 139 of 2008() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.36051/2007 Dated 06/12/2007 .................... APPELLANT: 5TH RESPONDENT ------------------------- MRS. K.K.RAJI, ADARSH, PALLIMURI, SOORANAD P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 522. BY ADV. SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM RESPONDENTS: PETITIONER & RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 -------------------------------------------- 1. C.A.SHAJAHAN, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU, VENGA, MYNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-595 001. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM - 691 001. 4. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, KOLLAM-691 001. 5. THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER, KUNNATHUR, KOLLAM-690 540. BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.B.KOSHY & K.HEMA,JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.A.No.139 of 2008 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT Koshy, J. Petitioner challenged Exhibits P3 notification and P6 order. By Exhibit P6 order, petitioner's application for appointment of an authorised wholesale ration dealer (AWD) was rejected. The writ appellant was selected. Exhibit P7 appeal filed by the petitioner is pending before the first respondent. The learned Single Judge directed the first respondent appellate authority to dispose of Exhibit P7 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It was also directed that in the meanwhile, further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P6 shall also be kept in abeyance for six weeks. The contention of the appellant is that the above order was passed without hearing him at the admission stage. We are of the view that the order was passed in the discretionary jurisdiction of the court. If ex parte interim stay was granted and notice was issued and after hearing the matter only writ petition was disposed of, it would have taken more time to dispose of the writ petition. After hearing the appellant also we are M.F.A.635/02 2 of the opinion that the order of the learned Single Judge is perfectly justified. Only four weeks time is granted to dispose of the appeal and Exhibit P6 order was directed to be kept in abeyance only for six weeks. We are of the view that a discretionary order of the learned Single Judge can be interfered only if it is patently illegal causing prejudice to the appellant. Since the appellate authority was directed to dispose of Exhibit P7 within four weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment, we see no reason to interfere with the judgment. The appellant is also free to approach the appellate authority to dispose of the matter expeditiously. The Writ Appeal is dismissed with the above directions. J.B.KOSHY, JUDGE K.HEMA, JUDGE vgs.