IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN MONDAY, THE 17TH OCTOBER 2011 / 25TH ASWINA 1933 WA.No. 1530 of 2011() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.24745/2011 Dated 20/09/2011 .................... APPELLANT(S): / RESPONDENTS 1 & 2 -------------- 1. BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN AND MANAGING DIRECTOR BHARAT BHAVAN, 4 * 6 CURRIM BHOY ROAD, BELLAD ESTATE, MUMBAI - 400 001. 2. THE TERRITORY MANAGER, BHARAT PETROLEUM CORPORATION LTD., LPG BOTTLING PLANT, AMBALAMUGAL, KOCHI - 682 302. BY ADV. SRI.N.N.SUGUNAPALAN, SENIOR ADVOCATE SRI.S.SUJIN RESPONDENT(S): / PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 3 & 4 : --------------- 1. CHITRA A.P., PARAPPINIYIL HOUSE, P.O.THUVVUR, (VIA), MANJERI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 505. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POST OFFICES, SPEED POST CENTRE, ERNAKULAM - 682 011. 3. POST MASTER GENERAL, KERALA THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 6 95 033. ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,ASG OF INDIA FOR R2 & R3 MS.P.V.ASHA, FOR R1 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/10/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, Ag.CJ. & P.S.GOPINATHAN, J. .................................................................... W.A. No.1530 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 17th day of October, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, Ag.CJ. Heard learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant, learned Asst. Solicitor General appearing for respondents 2& 3 and learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent. 2. First respondent sent an application for appointment for LPG distributorship, which was received by the appellants on 01/09/2011. Appellants' case is that last date fixed under the notification for receipt of application was 31/08/2011 and so much so application received on 01/09/2011 cannot be accepted. However, we notice that the clear finding of the learned Single Judge is that 31/08/2011 was a public holiday and therefore the postal authority could not deliver the application sent by the 1st respondent by speed post to the appellants on that day. It is seen that the application was received on the day following the public W.A.No.1530/2011 2 holiday. It is in this context, learned Single Judge directed the appellants to accept the application. We do not find any justification for the appellants which is a public sector undertaking to challenge the judgment of the learned Single Judge as in our view the appellant has no grievance in the matter at all. The technical argument raised by the appellants deserves to be only condemned and we do so. This writ petition is accordingly dismissed. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE) (P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE) jg