Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
ADHARSH K.K – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. writ petition seeks timely consideration of applications. (Para 2) |
| 2. counsel's argument stresses the urgency. (Para 3) |
| 3. court orders expedited processing of applications. (Para 4) |
JUDGMENT
The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:
"a) To issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or directions the second respondent to consider the Exhibit P3 series Form- 5 application submitted by the petitioner in a fixed time limit as this Hon’ble Court please.
b) Pass such other order or further directions in favor of the petitioner which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case. "
[SIC]
2. When this Writ Petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider Exts.P3 to P3(94) Form – 5 applications within a time frame.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader.
4. After hearing both sides, I think there can be a direction to consider Exts.P3 to P3(94) Form – 5 applications within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the f
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
