IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH MAY 2010 / 29TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15321 of 2010(M) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- JOHNSON JOSEPH S/O.LATE M.J.JOSEPH , AGED 39 YEARS, MANKUNNEL HOUSE, PANDAPILLY PO, MUVATTUPUZHA VIA ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA SRI.K.I.SAGEER RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPT OF CIVIL SUPPLIES, GOVT. SECRETARAIT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM . 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR OF CIVIL SUPPLIES THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 4. THE DISTRICT SUPPLY OFFICER, ERNAKULAM. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 15321 of 2010 ================== Dated this the 19th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's father was a licensee of an ARD. He died on 21.7.2007. According to the petitioner, under Clause 45(2) of the Kerala Rationing Order, the petitioner is entitled to licence as the legal heir. But, by Ext.P15 notification, the 4th respondent invited applications for appointment of fresh ARD. The petitioner submits that the petitioner has already been provisionally appointed by Ext.P13 order and in view of Clause 45(2) of the Kerala Rationing Order, the petitioner is entitled to be regularly appointed as ARD in the place of his father. Therefore, according to the petitioner, Ext.P15 notification inviting applications for appointment of fresh ARD is against the provisions of the Kerala Rationing Order. Therefore, the petitioner has filed Ext.P16 representation before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner seeks a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P16 expeditiously. Learned Government Pleader points out that Ext.P15 has been issued in compliance with the judgment of this Court dated 11.12.2009 in W.P.(C).No.35583/2009. He made available to the Court a copy of the said judgment. I am not gong into the merits of the contentions of the petitioner. Whether the said judgment is applicable to the w.p.c.15321/2010 2 petitioner's case or whether the petitioner is entitled to appointment under Section 45(2) of the Kerala Rationing Order is a matter which the 2nd respondent has to consider in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P16 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge