IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MAY 2011 / 4TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 13084 of 2007(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.R.VELAYI, AGED 69, S/O. RAVUNNI, ERUKATTI HOUSE, PEECHI VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, (IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DIVISION, THRISSUR. 4. THE JOINT DIRECTOR, K E R I, PEECHI, THRISSUR. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION DIVISION, MALAMPUZHA, PALAKKAD. GOVT. PLEADER SHRI.SANDESH RAJA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/05/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). No. 13084/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1. COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION BY R1 DTED 16.12.04. P2. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION OF THE PETITIONER DATED 17.11.05. P3. COPY OF THE POSTAL RECEIPTS CONCERNING Ext.P2. sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P.(C).No. 13084 of 2007 ================== Dated this the 25th day of May, 2011 J U D G M E N T The petitioner was working as a Fitter in the Irrigation Department, who retired from service in 1993. The petitioner submits that since 1982, as per the orders of the Government, the pay structure as revised by the Pay Revision Commission was made applicable to the Irrigation Department as well for the purpose of subsequent service benefits, which have not been given to the petitioner. According to the petitioner, similarly placed persons have received those benefits pursuant to a judgment of this Court dated 23.9.2004 in O.P.No.7800/2000. The petitioner also claims those benefits. Having failed to get favourable orders, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following relief: “To issue an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to consider Ext.P2, filed by the petitioner in the light of Ext.P1 and to extend the benefits as were disbursed based on Ext.P1, to the petitioner also within such time as may be fixed by this Hon'ble court in the interest of justice.” 2. I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition on account of unexplained delay and laches. Admittedly, the petitioner retired from service in 1993. Admittedly persons similarly placed filed a writ petition in 2000 and admittedly that writ petition was disposed of on 23.9.2004. Ext.P2 is dated 17.10.2005, still one year after. The w.p.c.13084/07 2 petitioner has filed this writ petition only on 12.4.2007. The petitioner is guilty of delay and laches at every stage. This Court will come to the help of only those persons who are prepared to help themselves. The petitioner, therefore, does not deserve any indulgence from this Court. Accordingly, this writ petition is dismissed. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge