IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR MONDAY, THE 13TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 22ND BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 22219 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- PRAKASHA.K,S/O.DERANNASHETTY, KARUVOLU HOUSE,KURUDAPADAV.P.O,UPPALA VIA, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.S.IMTHIYAZ AHAMMED SRI.SHIRAZ ABDULLA SRI.JOJO PAPPACHAN SRI.MUHAMMED NASARULLAH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,COLLECTOR'S OFFICE, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 2. DISTRICT OFFICER,SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT,KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 3. GENERAL MANAGER,KASARAGOD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK,KASARAGOD DISTRICT. ADDL. 4. THE SECRETARY, SOCIAL WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. (ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 5.8.2010 IN I.A.NO.10678/2010) BY G.P.SRI.K.S.MOHAMMED HASHIM FOR R1, R2 & R4 ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN,SC,KASARGOD DIST.CO.BAN FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 22219 of 2010(B) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE KASARAGOD DISTRICT DISABILITY BOARD DATED 27.6.2007. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED BY THE KASARAGOD DISTRICT CO-OPERATIVE BANK DATED 27.1.2000. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE G.O.P.NO.85/2007 DATED 30.11.2007. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19.9.2007. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT DATED 6.3.2010. // TRUE COPY // TKS C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.22219 of 2010 ---------------------------- Dated 13th September, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a person having 50% permanent disablement. He has submitted Ext.P4 representation before the third respondent. The contention of the petitioner is that he had been working under the third respondent Bank from 2.8.1999 to 27.1.2000 and by virtue of the said service, according to the petitioner, he is entitled to get the benefit of Ext.P3 Government order. He has taken up such contention in Ext.P4 representation. In the body of the writ petition Ext.P4 representation has been described as the representation submitted by the petitioner on 19.9.2007 whilst what is produced as Ext.P4 is the copy of the representation submitted on 6.3.2010. That apart, Exts.P4 and P5 are virtually the same representation. It is alleging inordinate delay in the matter of disposal of Exts.P4 and Ext.P5 representations that this writ petition has been filed. The contention of the petitioner is that he had been in the service of the third respondent Bank between 2.8.1999 and 27.1.2000. Evidently, Ext.P3 Government order provides certain benefits in respect of persons who have put in service between 15.8.1998 and 15.8.1999. As noticed hereinbefore, the contention of the petitioner is that he had submitted a representation on WP(C).No.22219/2010 2 19.9.2007. In case, such a representation has been received from the petitioner, the third respondent shall take up the same for consideration. At any rate, Ext.P4 representation submitted by the petitioner requires a consideration by the third respondent. In the circumstances, without making any observation as to the merits of the contentions raised by the petitioner in this writ petition, it is disposed of with a direction to the third respondent to consider and pass orders on the representation submitted by the petitioner on 19.9.2007. In case of its non-receipt Ext.P4 shall be considered by the third respondent. While considering the claim the third respondent shall look into Ext.P3 Government order as well. A decision based on the aforesaid direction shall be taken by the third respondent expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS