IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR THURSDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2009 / 18TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 724 of 2009(J) ------------------------ PETITIONER: --------------- AJITHKUMAR.S S/O.SANKARANKUTTY AGED 40 YEARS, SECURITY ASSISTANT (SA/G PIS NO.104740), INTELLIGENCE BUREAU (BUREAU OF IMMIGRATION), OFFICE OF FOREIGNERS REGIONAL REG.EAST BLOCK - 8, SECTOR - 1, RK PURAM, NEW DELHI - 110 066, NOW R/AT GK SADANAM, SOUTH ARYAD P.O., AVALUKKUNNU, ALAPUZHA DISTRICT, KERALA. BY ADV. SRI.C.A.CHACKO SMT.C.M.CHARISMA SRI.N.A.SHAFEEK RESPONDENTS: -------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, NEW DELHI. 2. JOINT DIRECTOR (ESTABLISHMENT), INTELLIGENCE BUREAU, 35, SARDAR PATTEL MARG, NEW DELHI. 3. JOINT DIRECTOR (IMMIGRATION), EAST BLOCK-8, SECTOR-1, RK PURAM, NEW DELHI - 110 066. 4. FOREIGNERS REGIONAL REGISTRATION OFFICER (FRRO), EAST BLOCK-8, SECTOR-1, RK PURAM, NEW DELHI - 110 066. BY P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASG THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 724 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 8th January,2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is working as a Security Assistant in the Intelligence Bureau ( Bureau of Immigration) under the 4th respondent. On 18.12.2008 he was sanctioned leave for one month and had left the work place to his native place at Alappuzha. On reaching home, he was served with Exhibit-P1 order passed by the 4th respondent dated 16.12.2008 by special messenger. By that order, he was informed that he is relieved from Intelligence Bureau with effect from 16.12.2008. The said order is based on an earlier order dated 21.5.2008 issued by the 2nd respondent. 2. According to the petitioner, the said order has not been served on him so far. Consequent on Exhibit-P1 order the leave sanctioned to the petitioner stands cancelled by Exhibit-P2. Aggrieved by Exhibits P1 and P2, this writ petition has been filed. W.P ( C) No. 724 of 2009 2 3. Learned Assistant Solicitor General pointed out that this Court will not be justified in interfering with an order in this nature of Ext.P1. At any rate, if the petitioner is aggrieved by Exhibit-P1, he will have to move the appropriate higher authority in the matter. Leaving open the said remedy, the writ petition is dismissed. No costs. (T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 724 of 2009 3 W.P ( C) No. 724 of 2009 4