IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
GOPINATH P., J
M. PURUSHOTHAMAN – Appellant
Versus
REGIONAL PROVIDENT FUND COMMISSIONER - II – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 2125 OF 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court discusses administrative obligations. (Para 2) |
| 2. judgment disposes the writ petition. (Para 3) |
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner has approached this court seeking a limited relief. He prays that Ext.P5 application filed by him before the 1st respondent be considered and disposed of within a time frame to be fixed by this court. 2. Heard Adv. Joseph Rony Jose, Standing counsel appearing for the respondents also.
3. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Standing counsel appearing for the respondents and having regard to the limited nature of the relief sought for by the petitioner, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing the 1st respondent or other competent authority to consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 application and dispose of the same in accordance with the law, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
Writ petition is disposed of as above.
Sd/-
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.