AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
12 paragraphs · 215 wordsR. Narayana Pisharadi, J
The relief sought in this writ petition reads as follows:
“i. To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction commanding the 3rd respondent to take into consideration Ext.P7 and to determine
the same on merits after completing the enquiry on the basis of law within specified time limits as may be fixed by this Honourable Court in the interest of justice.â€
When the writ petition is taken up for hearing today through video conferencing, there is no representation for the petitioner. Heard the learned
Senior Government Pleader who appeared for the third respondent.
Learned Senior Government Pleader submitted that, before filing Ext.P7 complaint before the third respondent, the petitioner had filed a complaint
before the Minister concerned and it had been forwarded to the third respondent for consideration. Learned Senior Government Pleader also submits
that, in the aforesaid petition, Ext.R3 decision has been taken by the third respondent. Learned Senior Government Pleader also submits that, Ext.R3
decision was taken by the third respondent after conducting an enquiry in which the petitioner was also heard.
In view of Ext.R3 decision, nothing survives for consideration in this writ petition and it has become infructuous.
Consequently, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.