IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 20TH MAY 2010 / 30TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 12813 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. MURALI KRISHNAN, AGED 28, S/O.LATE VELLINGIRI PALANI, H.NO.15/1725, RAMESWARAM COLONY, NAZARATH, KOCHI-2. 2. RAMESH.V, S/O.LATE VELLENGIRI PALANI, RESIDING AT HOUSE NO.22, NEAR NANCHAPPA SCHOOL, CHINNA NAGAR, THIRUPUR-1, TAMIL NADU. BY ADV. SRI.K.S.MADHUSOODANAN SRI.T.V.JAYAKUMAR NAMBOODIRI SRI.THUSHAR NIRMAL SARATHY SRI.M.M.VINOD KUMAR SMT.K.M.RAMYA RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA TO BE REP. BY SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR, URBAN AFFAIRS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.K.ANAND, SC, COCHIN CORPN. FOR R3 GP SRI.ARAVINDKUMAR BABU SC SRI. S.RAMESH BABU THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).12813/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 20th day of May, 2010 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioners is regarding the alleged non consideration of Ext.P2 application. 1st petitioner submits that he is the dependent of late Sri. Palani, a drain worker under the 3rd respondent. On the death of his father, 2nd petitioner submitted an application. Subsequently he withdrew the application by Ext.P1 and thereupon the 1st petitioner, younger son of the deceased, filed Ext.P2 application. Complaint is that the 3rd respondent has not taken any action on Ext.P2. 2. On instructions, learned Standing Counsel submits that they require an application from the petitioner containing the reasons leading to the withdrawal of 2nd petitioner's application and submission of the 1st petitioner's application and the petitioners have to submit a fresh application in order to enable him to forward the same to the 2nd respondent for appropriate action. W.P.(C).12813/10 2 3. Heard both sides. 4. If the 3rd respondent requires such an application in order to enable him to take appropriate action on the request made by the 1st petitioner for compassionate appointment, necessarily petitioners will have to comply with the same. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions. Petitioners shall make a proper application before the 3rd respondent in order to enable him to take action on the claim for compassionate appointment. It is directed that if the 1st petitioner makes an application as above within two weeks from today, 3rd respondent shall take appropriate action for forwarding the same to the authority concerned without any further delay. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs