IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 14TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 23RD KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31781 of 2008(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- SANTHOSH GEORGE, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.C.X.GEORGE, CHELLATT HOUSE, PERUMPILLY CHURCH ROAD, NJARAKKAL P.O. KOCHI - 682 505. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY DEPT OF HOME AFFAIRS, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, (RURAL) ALUVA, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, NJARAKKAL POLICE STATION, NJARAKKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.31781 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 14th November, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is aggrieved by the action taken by the 3rd respondent against treating the petitioner as included in the “rowdy list”. According to him, this is done on the basis of the fact that two crimes were allegedly registered against the petitioner as early as in the year 1996. It is the petitioner’s assertion that he was never charge sheeted before a court of law let alone be convicted that he was not tried as well. In such circumstances, inclusion of the petitioner’s name in the “rowdy list”, according to him, is illegal. Petitioner seeks to join his wife, who is settled in New Zealand and apprehends that a police verification at this stage would bring about adverse remarks against him. 2. Learned Government Pleader, on instructions submits that Exhibit P5 representation submitted by the petitioner before the Superintendent of Police is pending W.P ( C) No.31781 of 2008 2 consideration. Reports have been forwarded to the Superintendent of Police by the S.I of Police. 3. If that be so, there is no reason why there should be further delay in action being taken on Exhibit P5. If the assertions made by the petitioner are correct then I am sure that the Superintendent of Police shall consider not only directing the deletion of petitioner's name from the “rowdy list” but also directing further appropriate action to be taken to see that the petitioner’s name is cleared. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Exhibit P5, hear the petitioner and take a decision thereon, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.31781 of 2008 3 W.P ( C) No.31781 of 2008 4