IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH JANUARY 2008 / 27TH POUSHA 1929 WA.No. 145 of 2008 --------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN W.P.(C).NO.35336/2007 DATED 29/11/2007 .................... APPELLANT/PETITIONER: ------------------------------------- K.C.RAJENDRAN, S/O.(LATE) K.V.CHANDRAN, KUNNAMBATH HOUSE, PANDIKKAVU, PERINGAVU P.O., THRISSUR. BY ADV. SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU. RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS: ----------------------------------------------- 1. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, MINISTRY FOR COMMUNICATIONS AND I.T.SANCHAR BHAVAN, NEW DELHI. 2. THE CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM, BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM LIMITED, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE PRINCIPAL GENERAL MANAGER, OFFICE OF THE PGMT, PALACE ROAD, THRISSUR-20. 4. THE GENERAL MANAGER, TELECOM DISTRICT, THRISSUR. BY ADV. SMT.D.P.RENU,CGC,. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/01/2008,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & P.N. RAVINDRAN, JJ. --------------------------------------------------------------- W.A.NO.145 OF 2008 -------------------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair, J: Appellant is the writ petitioner. The petitioner's father died on 1.9.2000 while he was an employee of the B.S.N.L. He submitted an application for appointment under the dying in harness scheme on 26.3.2001. The competent authority of the B.S.N.L considered that application and rejected it by Ext.P2 order dated 18.2.2002. The petitioner submits, he filed a representation before the Union Minister of State for Communication and Information Technology, Government of India on 2.8.2002. From the Minister's office, the same was forwarded to the competent authority as evident from Ext.P3 dated 17.9.2002. Thereafter, the petitioner filed Ext.P4 representation before the competent authority of the B.S.N.L claiming employment on 10.9.2007, after 5 years and 7 months of the rejection of his first application by Ext.P2. The writ petition was filed on 28.11.2007 seeking to quash Ext.P2 dated 18.2.2002. The learned Judge felt that the claim made in the writ petition is W.A.NO.145/2008 . 2 stale. In view of the unexplained delay in challenging Ext.P2, the writ petition was dismissed, This appeal is filed challenging the said judgment of the learned Single Judge. We notice that no grounds have been raised in this appeal to get over the delay in approaching this Court. So, we are of the view that the learned Single Judge rightly exercised the discretion in declining to entertain the writ petition. Accordingly, the writ appeal fails and it is dismissed. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE. P.N. RAVINDRAN, JUDGE. cl W.A.NO.145/2008 . 3 W.A.NO.145/2008 . 4