IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 7TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 18TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 4521 of 2008(L) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ S.VIMAL BOSE, S/O. SURENDHRAN, AGED 28, SUNIL SADHANAM, PEZHUMTHURUTHU, PERUMON P.O., KOLLAM-691 601. BY ADV. SRI.G.KRISHNAKUMAR SRI.N.B.RAJU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. RAILWAY BOARD, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAY, NEW DELHI. 2. SOUTHERN RAILWAY, DIVISIONAL OFFICE, PERSONAL BRANCH, TRIVANDRUM-4. BY SC, RAILWAYS SRI.N.B.SUNIL NATH, THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 4521 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 7th February, 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner's claim is an unusual one arising from what will have to be acknowledged as an act of service rendered by him on 14.11.2001, when noticing a rift in the railway track in Pattamnthuruth, he rushed to the railway station and conveyed information to the Station Master. It seems that petitioner’s timely intervention was instrumental in the prevention of a huge disaster. Petitioner’s services was appreciated from many quarters, as evidenced by Exhibits P1 to P3. 2. Petitioner is an unemployed youth and therefore he thought the railway should be gracious and give him employment suited to his qualifications. Apparently, a Member of the Parliament addressed the railways in this regard. But it was met with Exhibit P5 reply expressing their unwillingness. Learned counsel for the petitioner is right in pointing out the reasons stated in Exhibit P5 do not seem to be correct or tenable. Petitioner has now preferred Exhibit P7 before the Chairman of W.P ( C) No. 4521 of 2008 2 the railway board. 3. I heard the learned standing counsel for the respondents also. Having perused the averments in the writ petition and having heard the counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Exhibit P7 sympathetically, keeping in mind Exhibit P6 as a precedent, and take a decision thereon, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (V.GIRI, JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 4521 of 2008 2 W.P ( C) No. 4521 of 2008 2 K.THANKAPPAN,J CRL.A. NO.92 OF 1999 ORDER 25th May, 2007