SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 9622

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
SOUMEN SEN, CJ, SYAM KUMAR V.M., J
SHAJPRASHANTH K.A – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
WP(PIL) NO. 153 OF 2025



Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.L.RAJESH NARAYAN, SMT.KEERTHANA SARIGA T.S.
For the Respondents: SHRI.N.MANOJ KUMAR

The court mandates the government to consider and dispose of the petition regarding sponsorships within a specified timeframe.

Headnote:This writ petition seeks a writ in the nature of mandamus directing the government to consider exhibits related to sponsorship by government departments. The State Attorney assures decision on pending matters. The court records the statement and mandates the government to respond in three months, leading to the closure of the petition.

Table of Content
1. petition seeks mandamus for government to act on sponsorship complaints. (Para 1)
2. state attorney confirms decision timeline for complaints. (Para 2)
3. court records assurance for timely government response. (Para 3)

JUDGMENT Dated this the 12th day of February, 2026 Syam Kumar V.M., J.

This writ petition is filed seeking the following prayers:

“i. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any such other writ, direction or orders commanding the 1st respondent to consider Exhibit P5 and initiate appropriate action to ban and restrict acceptance of sponsorship by government departments including Police Department;

ii. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any such other writ, direction or orders commanding the 1st respondent to initiate steps to create a separate department under the Finance Ministry to accept and utilize sponsorships and donations for the development of the state, and to prohibit acceptance of any type of gifts by public servants in any occasions;

iii. issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any such other writ, direction or orders commanding the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5 and initiate action forthwith;

iv. Dispense with production of translation of vernacular documents;

v. Issue any such other writ, appropriate order or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deems fit and proper considering the facts and circumstances of the case. ”

2. Today, when the matter was taken up for consideration, the learned State Attorney submits that Ext.P5 is presently pending consideration before the Government and assures that a decision would be taken thereon within a period of three months.

3. The said statement of the learned State Attorney is recorded. The Government shall consider and dispose of Ext.P5 in accordance with law within a period of three months.

4. The writ petition is accordingly closed.

Sd/-

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top