Simy vs State Of Kerala And Ors

When this matter was called today, Sri.S.R.Dayananda Prabhu â€" learned counsel for the petitioner, conceded that pending this lis, Ext.R3(L)

judgment was delivered by a learned Division Bench of this Court in W.A.No.211/2015 and connected matters. He submitted that in terms of the

liberty granted to his client in paragraph 6 of the said judgment, she has already preferred a representation before the Government and pleads that

same be directed to be taken up and disposed of at the earliest. He says that if this is granted, no further reliefs are required in this Writ Petition.

The learned Government Pleader â€" Sri.Sunil Kumar Kuriakose, submitted that if the petitioner is confining her plea as afore, his clients will not

stand in the way of this Writ Petition being disposed of; but added that the representation said to have been filed by her has not yet been produced on

record. He submitted that, however, if the representation is still pending before the competent Authority, said Authority will dispose it of, after

following due procedure and after hearing all parties, without any further delay.

When I consider the request made by the learned counsel for the petitioner as afore, it is indubitable that I am incapacitated from passing a firm

order on account of the fact that the representation, said to have been filed by his client, has not been produced on record and also because same has

been preferred on the strength of the liberty granted by the learned Division Bench.

Nevertheless, I am of the view, so as to obtain substantial justice to all parties, that there will be no prejudice to anyone if this Court is to direct the

competent Secretary of the Government to consider and pass orders on the representation preferred by the petitioner at the earliest.

Resultantly, this Writ Petition is disposed of without considering any of the reliefs sought for; however, directing the competent Secretary of the

Government to act in terms of the directions in Ext.R3(L) judgment - if the petitioner has already preferred a representation in terms of paragraph 6

thereof - and to dispose it of, after affording all parties an opportunity of being heard â€" either physically or through videoconferencing â€" as

expeditiously as is possible, but not later than four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.