Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 26780

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, J
N.T.DAVIS – Appellant
Versus
COCHIN PORT TRUST – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 35264 OF 2015

Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.S.SREEKUMAR (SR.),SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE,SRI.P.PRIJITH,SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
For the Respondents: SRI.K.ANAND (SR.),SMT.LATHA ANAND, SC, COCHIN PORT TRUST

Writ petition dismissed due to absence of petitioner's counsel.

Headnote:First Paragraph: The petition challenges promotion decisions under Recruitment, Seniority and Promotion Regulations, 2010 (Ext.P1), including orders dated 03/04/2013 (Ext.P2), 23/08/2013 (Ext.P3), and seniority list dated 01/08/2015 (Ext.P5). Petitioner submitted representation (Ext.P8) against exclusions. Court found counsel absent. Second Paragraph: No issues framed due to default. No ratio established. Last Paragraph: Writ Petition dismissed for default.

Table of Content
1. dismissal for counsel's absence. (Para 1)

JUDGMENT

1. The learned counsel for the petitioner is absent. Accordingly, this Writ Petition is dismissed for default.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

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 :

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 26780

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMM.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, JN.T.DAVIS – AppellantVersusCOCHIN PORT TRUST – RespondentWP(C) NO. 35264 OF 2015

Writ petition dismissed due to absence of petitioner's counsel.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM, J
N.T.DAVIS – Appellant
Versus
COCHIN PORT TRUST – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 35264 OF 2015