IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 13TH MARCH 2009/ 22ND PHALGUNA 1930 WP(C).No. 30560 of 2007(K) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- C.R.DEVASSY, SON OF RAPHAEL, CHITTALAPPILLY HOUSE, PONNORE DESOM, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.P.R.VENKETESH, MR.ABRAHAM GEORGE JACOB. RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF FOOD AND CIVIL SUPPLIES, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE COMMISSIONER OF CIVIL SUPPLIES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR. 4. T.A.JOSE AND COMPANY, AWD NO.III AND IV, MUNDUR, THRISSUR REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING PARTNER E.O.LAWRENCE. R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER BY ADDL.ADVOCATE GENERAL MR. RENJITH THAMPAN R4 BY ADV. MR. K.I.MAYANKUTTY MATHER, SMT.S.LAKSHMY. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 13/02/2009 THE COURT ON 13/03/2009 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss WPC.NO.30560/2007 K APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DTD. 13/10/2005. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.27315 OF 2006 DTD. 1/02/2007. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER AND 66 OTHERS DTD. 16/02/2007. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) 12378 OF 2007 DTD. 10/04/2007. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 23/06/2007 SERVED ON THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.11529 OF 2007 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss ANTONY DOMINIC,J. ----------------------- W.P.(C).No. 30560 OF 2007 ------------------------ Dated this the 13th day of March, 2009. JUDGMENT Petitioner is an Authorized Retail Distributor attached to the 4th respondent, an Authorized Wholesale Distributor. It is stated that the appointment of the 4th respondent, was ordered to be cancelled by the 2nd respondentand that the matter was pending in revision before the first respondent. At that stage the petitioner filed Ext.P3 representation, before the first respondent which was directed to be considered in Ext.P4 judgment rendered by this court in WP (c).No.12378/07. The apprehension of the petitioner highlighted in this writ petition is that though orders were not passed on Ext.P3, steps were being taken to implement the order of the 2nd respondent cancelling the appointment of the 4th respondent. WP(c).N.30560/07 /2/ This court by judgment dated 03/3/2009 in WP(c). No.30292/07 has set aside the order passed by the Government affirming the order of the 2nd respondent cancelling the appointment of the 4th respondent and the matter is directed to be reconsidered with notice to the 4th respondent. In view of that judgment, as at present the appointment of the 4th respondent still continues, no further orders are called for in this writ petition. This writ petition will therefore stand disposed of in the light of the judgment in WP(c).No.30292/2007. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/ WP(c).N.30560/07 /2/