IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2009 / 3RD ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 14047 of 2009(A) --------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. ANTONY.K.O., AGED 72, S/O.OUSEPH, KAPPATTIL HOUSE, PAUL ABRO ROAD, COCHIN-18. 2. BRIJIT ANTONY, AGED 63, W/O.ANTONY, KAPPATTIL HOUSE, PAUL ABRO ROAD, COCHIN-18. BY ADVS. MR.K.I.ABDUL RASHEED, MR.K.A.SHAMSUDEEN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ERNAKULAM. 3. JOSEPH.K.ETHEN BURT, KAVARIYAR, PAUL ABRO ROAD, ERNAKULAM-682 018. R1 & R2 BY MR.K.ANAND, SC, COCHIN CORPN., R3 BY ADV. MR.SAJAN MANNALI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No.14047 of 2009-A = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 24th day of June, 2009. JUDGMENT In terms of the counter statement placed on record, the plea of the petitioner that though the order was passed on 4.4.2009, it was served on the petitioner only on 13.5.2009 is not much in dispute because the plea of the first respondent is that the order was issued only on 11.5.2009. Going by the nature of the findings in Ext.P6, it is agreed by all parties that having regard to the health condition of the petitioners, it is appropriate that the petitioners are given a further opportunity of hearing on account of their plea that they could not represent their case appropriately before the Secretary of the Corporation. Under such circumstances, the impugned Ext.P6 is quashed directing the petitioners and the third WP(C)14047/09 -: 2 :- respondent to mark their appearance before the second respondent on the 7th July, 2009 so that the second respondent can fix an appropriate date for hearing them or their representatives and decide on the issue on the basis of materials that may be placed. Let a final decision follow within an outer limit of three months. It is clarified that this judgment does not express anything on the merits of the rival contentions. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/290609