IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2009 / 7TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 2804 of 2009(H) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- NAVJATH, S/O.RUDRASENAN, KUNNUMPURATH VEEDU, NOW RESIDING AT TSUNAMI SHELTER, WARD NO.1, AZHEEKAL THURA, ALAPPAD PANCHAYATH, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.G.BHAGAVAT SINGH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KARUNAGAPPALLY TALUK, KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM. 4. KARUNAKARAN, PUTHENKATTIL, PRAYAR P.O., AYIRAMTHENGU. 5. SHYLAJA, D/O.KARUNAKARAN, PUTHENKATTIL, KLAPPANA P.O., VARAVILA. 6. DILEEP KUMAR, S/O.KARUNAKARAN, PUTHENKATTIL, KLAPPANA P.O., VARAVILA. 7. RAJAMMA, PUTHUVALIL, AZHEEKAL P.O., AZHEEKAL. 8. PRASAD, S/O.RAJAMMA, PUTHUVALIL, AZHEEKAL P.O., AZHEEKAL. /2/ 9. PONNAPPAN, S/O.RAJAMMA, PRAYAR P.O., ALUMPEEDIKA VAZHY, KARUNAGAPPALLY. 10. KAILASAN, S/O.RAJAMMA, PUTHUVALIL, ALUMPEEDIKA P.O., ALUMPEEDIKA. 11. SATHYAVAN, AMBANAD, AZHEEKAL P.O., AZHEEKAL. 12. PRASAD, S/O.SATHYAVAN, AMBANAD, AZHEEKAL P.O., AZHEEKAL. 13. PRADEEP, S/O.SATHYAVAN, AMBANAD, KULASEKHARAPURAM P.O., ADINADU SOUTH. 14. SUBRAMONIAN, PEEDIKAYIL, ALAPPAD. 15. SOBHA, W/O.SUBRAMONIAN, KOLLAPPURATH, AZHEEKAL P.O., KARUNAGAPPALLY. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. M.R. SREELATHA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ----------------------- W.P.(C).No.2804 OF 2009 ------------------------ Dated this the 27th day of January, 2009. JUDGMENT Seeking the benefits available to the Tsunami Victims the petitioner filed WP(c).No.24736/08. That writ petition was dismissed by Ext.P5 judgment dated 20th January 2009, holding that nothing has been placed on record to substantiate the claim that the petitioner was living separately from his family members to be eligible for the benefit claimed. Now this writ petition is filed claiming the same benefits and producing additional materials and contending that the petitioner was living separately from his family members and therefore was eligible for the benefits available to the Tsunami victims. In my view a second writ petition on the same cause of action is not maintainable. If at all the petitioner is aggrieved by the judgment rendered in WP(c).No.24736/08, WP(c).No.2804/09 /2/ the remedy available to him is to seek a review or file an appeal. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/