Shinoj K vs Kerala Headload Workers Welfare Board

P.V.Kunhikrishnan, J

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

“i) Writ of certiorari, or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, quashing and setting aside the decision of the 2nd respondent rejecting Exhibit P-4 complaint which was intimated vide Exhibit P-5.

ii) Writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or directing respondents 1 to 3 to implement Exhibits P.1 and P-2,

iii) Writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, order or directing the 1st respondent to take action on Exhibit P-6 appeal within a time frame,

iv) issue such other writ, order or direction as are deemed just and proper on the facts and circumstances of the case, and

v) Issue a writ, order or direction to dispense with filing of the translation of vernacular documents.” (sic)

When this writ petition came up for consideration, the counsel for the petitioners confines his prayer for a consideration of Ext.P6 representation by the 1st respondent.

Heard the counsel for the petitioners and the Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 to 3. No notice is necessary to the 4th respondent at this stage.

After hearing both sides, I think this writ petition can be disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P6 within a time frame, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the 4th respondent.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P6 representation and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.