IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2008 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1930 WP(C).No. 3270 of 2004(L) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- K.S.SOBHANAKUMARI, KALAPURAKKAL HOUSE, MANJADI P.O., THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM (SR.) SRI.S.SHARAN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, PULIKKEEZHU, THIRUVALLA. 2. DISTRICT SAVINGS OFFICER, O/O THE NATIONAL SAVINGS, PATHANAMTHITTA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/06/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.3270/2004 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE APPOINTMENT OF ORDER OF THE PETITIONER AS AUTHORISED AGENT TO COLLECT MONEY FROM PERSONS IN THAT AREA FOR INVESTING IN POST OFFICE RECURRING DEPOIST DT. 3.11.83. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE RENEWAL ORDER ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 1.11.1992 TO 20.8.2000. DT. 22.10.1998. EXT.P3:- COPY OF THE RENEWAL ORDER ISUED TO THE PETITIONER FOR THE PERIOD FROM 30.8.2000 TO 29.8.2003 DT. 29.8.2000. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE ORDER OF SUSPENSION ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER DT. 28.5.2003. ET.P5:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 29.9.2003 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.3270 OF 2004 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of June, 2008 JUDGMENT This writ petition was filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P4. In Ext.P4, the petitioner was directed to show cause why the petitioner's agency under the Government of India Small Savings Scheme and the Mahila Pradhan Kshethriya Bachat Yojna should not be cancelled for misconducts stated therein. On 6.2.2004, this Court passed the following order: “G.P. takes notice. The petitioner will approach the first respondent with all the documents available and the 1 st respondent will conduct enquiry with the depositors and after collecting information from the depositors and verifying whether there is any misappropriation, he will file a detailed statement about the petitioner's eligibility for renewal and the lapses committed by the petitioner within one month”. Now the learned Government Pleader makes available to me an order dated 25.3.2008 by which the petitioner's agency has been cancelled. That being so, without challenging that order cancelling the agency, the petitioner cannot maintain a challenge W.P.(c)No.3270/04 2 against Ext.P4 alone. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the order of cancellation, this writ petition is closed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd