IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 10TH DECEMBER 2009 / 19TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 30277 of 2008(D) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ R.BALACHANDRAN, RATIONING INSPECTOR, TALUK SUPPLY OFFFICE, RANNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. BY ADVS. MR.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI SMT.SABINA JAYAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVNANATHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. E1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.ANTONY MUKKATH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 10/12/2009, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 13286 OF 2009 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.30277/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 2.4.07 IN WP(C) NO.11393/2007 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P2:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 28.3.07 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P3:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 7.1.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P4:- COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 28.11.07 FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P5:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DTD. 28.1.08 IN WP(C) NO.2154/2008 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT. P6:- COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DTD. 28.2.08 . P7:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DTD. 2.7.08 FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. P8:- COPY OF THE APPEAL DTD. 12.8.08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE tss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NOs. 30277 OF 2008 & 13286 OF 2009 ===================== Dated this the 10th day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner was resisting deputation to the Kerala State Civil Supplies Corporation mainly relying on the pendency of Civil Appeal No.2764/02 before the Apex Court, which was filed against the judgment in WA NO.2261/97 and connected cases. 2. Respondents have now brought to my notice the order dated 1/9/2009 passed by the Apex Court dismissing the Civil Appeal. Although the counsel for the petitioner has submitted that a review petition filed is pending consideration of the Apex Court, having regard to the fact that the Civil Appeal has been dismissed by the order referred to above, I do not think it appropriate to keep the writ petition pending with the interim order passed. Writ petitions fail and are dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp