IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DECEMBER 2009 / 2ND POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 37175 of 2009(N) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.C.RAMAKRISHNAN, SUPERINTENDENT, CHALAKKUDY MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, CHALAKKUDY. BY ADV. SRI.S.RAMESH BABU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DIRECTOR OF URBAN AFFAIRS, DIRECTORATE OF URBAN AFFAIRS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. By Govt. Pleader Smt. Anu Sivaraman THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 37175 OF 2009 (N) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims that his date of promotion as Revenue Inspector and as Superintendent in the Municipal Common Service is liable to be refixed with retrospectivity. It is stated that urging this claim he has filed Ext.P2 before the 2nd respondent. There was no response and therefore he moved Ext.P4 before the first respondent. To this also there was no response. It is in these circumstances the writ petition is filed. 2. If as stated by the petitioner he has urged his grievance before the 2nd respondent by filing Ext.P2 that ought to have been considered. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to take up, consider and pass orders on Ext.P2, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 4 weeks from the date of production of a copy of the judgment along with a copy of this writ petition. Needless to say that if any benefits are found to be due to the petitioner, that shall also be disbursed. (ANTONY DOMINIC) vi JUDGE WPC.No. /09 :2 :