IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 3RD SEPTEMBER 2010 / 12TH BHADRA 1932 WP(C).No. 27354 of 2010(T) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- THADAYOOSE, PUTHUVAL PURAYIDAM, PARUTHIYOOR, POZHIYOOR P.O., NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.SASIDHARAN UNNITHAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE REGIONAL EXECUTIVE, KERALA FISHERMEN'S WELFARE FUND BOARD, M.P.APPAN ROAD, VAZHUTHACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DIRECTOR, KERALA STATE INSURANCE DEPARTMENT, HOUSING BOARD BUILDING, THIRUANANTHAPURAM – 695 001. R1 BY SRI. ASOK M. CHERIAN, S.C, R2 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/09/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.27354 of 2010 (T) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 3rd day of September, 2010 J U D G M E N T According to the petitioner, he submitted Ext.P5 claim form before the 1st respondent lodging an application for compensation of Rs.50,000/- arising out of the disability caused to the petitioner. It is stated that on receipt of Ext.P5, the 1st respondent forwarded the claim to the 2nd respondent for settlement. It is stated that despite long lapse of time, the 2nd respondent has not settled the claim and therefore, this writ petition has been filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, Ext.P5 claim for compensation has been forwarded to the 2nd respondent and is pending before him, necessarily, the 2nd respondent should pass orders in the matter. In view of the case of the petitioner regarding the pendency of Ext.P5 before the 2nd respondent, I direct him to pass orders on Ext.P5. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within eight weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg