IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 16TH DECEMBER 2008 / 25TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 36396 of 2008(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SHAJAHAN V.Y. S/O. YACOB, VATTAPARAMBIL HOUSE, KODUNGALLOOR. BY ADV. SRI.PHILIP T.VARGHESE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR, 3. P.A.THANKAMMA, AUTHORISED WHOLESALE DEALER NO.1 (UNDER SUSPENSION), KOTHAPARAMBU, S.N.PURAM, KODUNGALLOOR-680668. ADV. SRI.V.V.ASOKAN FOR R3 G.P. SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 36396 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 16th day of December, 2008 J U D G M E N T In Ext.P10 judgment, while dismissing the earlier writ petition filed by the petitioner, I had specifically observed that it would be open to the petitioner to file a public interest litigation if ultimately the appeal ends in an order favourable to the 2nd respondent, challenging that order, if he is legally entitled to maintain such petition. Now the appeal has ended in an order favourable to the 2nd respondent. That being so, the remedy of the petitioner was to file a public interest litigation as observed in Ext.P10 judgment. However, instead of filing a public interest litigation, the petitioner has filed this writ petition which is not constituted as a public interest litigation. Therefore, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition and accordingly, the same is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge 2