Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.M. MANOJ, J
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – Appellant
Versus
DR V G MADHURIMA – Respondent
RP NO. 399 OF 2023 | W.P.(C) NO.13210 OF 2018
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. government's review petition regarding compliance with representations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's modification and restoration of writ petition. (Para 3) |
ORDER
The review petition has been filed by the Government, aggrieved by the judgment dated 18.03.2021 in W.P.(C) No. 1033 of 2020 and the connected matters.
2. It is the contention of the review petitioner that, though the other writ petitions pertain to Rule 14E of Part III of the Kerala Service Rules, W.P.(C) No. 13210 of 2018 is in no way connected thereto and only concerns the consideration of a representation for granting the balance gratuity amount. The petitioner in W.P.(C) No. 13210 of 2018, however, has submitted that the main prayer in the writ petition has already been complied with by the respondents by considering Ext.P3 representation and passing appropriate orders.
In such circumstances, the writ petition has become infructuous.
3. Upon evaluating these contentions, I deem it appropriate to modify the judgment dated 18.03.2021 to the extent of recalling the judgment in W.P.(C) No.13210 of 2018 and to record that the said writ petition, in view of the submission made by the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner therein, has become infructuous upon disposal of Ext.P3 representation as sought in the writ petition.
Accordingly, the review petition is allowed and W.P.(C) No.
13210 of 2018 is restored to file.
Sd/-
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
