IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH TUESDAY, THE 8TH JANUARY 2008 / 18TH POUSHA 1929 WA.No. 1585 of 2005 ----------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN OP.24351/2001 Dated 24/08/2004 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- A.V.SULOCHANA, W/O.LATE K.V.BALACHANDRAN, KANDAMCHALIL HOUSE, P.O.KAVUMBHAGOM, THALASSERY-1. BY ADV. SRI.A.MOHAMED MUSTAQUE RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. THE STATE BANK OF INDIA, LOCAL HEAD OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DEPUTY GENERAL MANAGER, ZONAL OFFICE, STATE BANK OF INDIA, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE BRANCH MANAGER, STATE BANK OF INDIA, KODUVALLY. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & K.M.JOSEPH, J. ------------------------------------------ W.A.No.1585 of 2005 ------------------------------------------ Dated, this the 8th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT H.L.Dattu, C.J. This writ appeal is filed against the order passed by the learned Single Judge in O.P.No.24351 of 2001 dated 24th August, 2004. (2) The learned Single Judge while rejecting the original petition has only observed that the dismissal of the original petition will not stand in the way of the respondent authorities considering any representation filed by the petitioner. (3) Sri.A.Mohammed Mustaque, learned counsel appearing for the appellant, would submit that the learned Single Judge having permitted the appellant to make a representation before the respondent authorities for certain reliefs, had not issued any positive direction to the authorities to consider that representation in accordance with law. Therefore, he makes a request to direct the respondent authorities to consider the representation that may be filed by the appellant in accordance with law. (4) In our view, without going into the other details or the grounds urged in the writ appeal, this appeal can be disposed of conceding to the request made by the learned counsel appearing for the appellant. (5) Accordingly we pass the following: ORDER i) The writ appeal stands rejected by confirming the orders passed by the learned Single Judge, since the appellant's learned counsel has not argued the case on merits of the appeal. W.A.No.1585 of 2005 2 ii) We permit the appellant as directed by the learned Single Judge to make an appropriate representation for appropriate relief before the respondent authorities within a month's time from today. (ii) If such a representation is made within the time granted, the respondent authorities will consider the same in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (K.M.JOSEPH) JUDGE vns