IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID MONDAY, THE 8TH AUGUST 2011 / 17TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 26640 of 2010(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- 1. DINESAN.P.K., PUTHUPARAMBU, KOTTAMURI.P.O, CHANGANASSERRY. 2. SAJITHKUMAR.P.S, PUTHUPARAMBIL, KOTTAMURI.P.O, CHANGANASSERRY. 3. RAJESH.K.R, VADAKKETHIL HOUSE, KOTTAMURI.P.O, CHANGANASSERRY. 4. MANOJ CHELLAPPAN, CHIRAPPURAYIDOM, PALIYADAM,THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI. S. SREEDEV RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KERALA STATE ROAD TRANSPORT CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, KSRTC, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 023. 2. KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. *ADDL. R3 TO R9 IMPLEADED *3. S. SREEKUMARAN NAIR, RANI BHAVAN, KOLIYUR, MUTTAKKADU (P.O.), VENGANOOR, TRIVANDRUM. *4. S.V. MANOJ KUMAR, KAMALA BHAVAN, KOTTUKAL P.O., TRIVANDRUM. *5. K. MANIAN, VAZHAVILAKATH VEEDU, THALAKKODU, MULLOOR (P.O.), TRIVANDRUM. ...2/- WP(C).No. 26640 of 2010(D) -2- *6. NARAYANARAJ G., T.C. 36/1090, “NARAYALANILAYAM”, EANCHAKKAL, VALLAKKADAVU (P.O.), TRIVANDRUM - 695 008. *7. V.K. SAJEEV, “SREE”, T.C. 54/2348, PRA 158, VISWAMBHARAN ROAD, PAPPANAMCODE P.O., TRIVANDRUM - 18. *8. S. BABURAJ, KULATHUVILAKATHU VEEDU, T.C. 40/1621, MANACADU (P.O.), TRIVANDRUM. *9. V.R. SURESH KUMAR, MURUKAVILASOM, URIAYAKODE (P.O.), VELLANADU, TRIVANDRUM - 695 543. *ADDL. R3 TO R9 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN I.A. NO. 9873/11 DATED 28/6/11. R1 BY ADVS. SRI.V.V.NANDAGOPAL NAMBIAR, SC, KSRTC SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA R2 BY ADVS. SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC SRI. ALEXANDER THOMAS, SC R3 TO R9 BY ADV. SRI.ELVIN PETER P.J. R3 TO R5 BY ADVS. SRI.B.S.SWATHY KUMAR SMT.ANITHA RAVINDRAN SMT.M.G.AISHWARYA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 08/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 26640 of 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 8th day of August 2011. JUDGMENT When the matter was taken up for consideration on 1.8.2011 and 4.8.2011, there was no representation for the petitioners. Neither the petitioners nor their counsel were present. Therefore, the matter was again adjourned to this day. Counsel for the respondents are present. Today also neither the petitioners nor their counsel are present. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed for default. HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE al