IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.V.K.BALI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 21ST NOVEMBER 2006 / 30TH KARTHIKA 1928 WA.No. 536 of 2006() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.27844/2004 Dated 09/11/2005 .................... APPELLANTS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 IN THE WP ---------------------------------------------------- 1. THE ACCOUNTS OFFICER (TR-II) (COMP) CALICUT TELECOM DISTRICT, CALICUT. 2. THE DISTRICT MANAGER, BHARATH SANCHAR NIGAM, TELECOM, CALICUT. 3. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF TELECOMMUNICATION, NEWDELHI BY ADV. SRI.C.S.RAMANATHAN RESPONDENTS/PETITIONER/4TH RESPONDENT IN WP ----------------------------------------------------------- 1. N.P.MOIDU, ADVOCATE, 5/102A, PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. TAHASILDAR, PERINTHALMANNA. BY ADV. SRI.T.SETHUMADHAVAN SRI.K.JAYESH MOHANKUMAR SRI.PUSHPARAJAN KODOTH R2 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.M.R.SABU THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/11/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.K. BALI, C.J. & S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------- W.A.No.536 of 2006 ------------------------------- Dated, this the 21st day of November, 2006 JUDGMENT V.K.Bali,C.J.(Oral) Learned counsel for the appellants states that since the first respondent who was a practising lawyer has now expired, the appellants would not press this appeal, but the order under appeal may not be treated as a precedent. This writ appeal is dismissed as withdrawn by specifically observing that judgment under appeal shall not be treated as a precedent. V.K. BALI, CHIEF JUSTICE. S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE. vns