Kerala High Court
WP(C)/38053/2008 of P.P.PRAMOD Vs COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD on 26 December 2008
HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 26TH DECEMBER 2008 / 5TH POUSHA 1930 WP(C).No. 38053 of 2008(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. P.P.PRAMOD AGED 42, PALLITHAZHATH HOUSE,PO.ENGANDIYOOR, THRISSUR. 2.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT :
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC
FRIDAY, THE 26TH DECEMBER 2008 / 5TH POUSHA 1930
WP(C).No. 38053 of 2008(E)
--------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
---------------
1. P.P.PRAMOD AGED 42, PALLITHAZHATH HOUSE,PO.ENGANDIYOOR, THRISSUR.
2. P.K.RAKESH, AGED 39 YEARS, ELEDATH HOUSE, P.O. NANDIPULAM VIA CHENGALOOR, THRISSUR DISTRICT.
BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT
RESPONDENT(S):
---------------
1. COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD REP. BY
THE COMMISSIONER, COCHIN DEVASWOM
COMMISSIONERS OFFICE, THRISSUR.
2. SECRETARY, COCHIN DEVASWOM BOARD,
COCHIN DEVASWOM COMMISSIONERS OFFICE, THRISSUR.
BY SC SRI. K. GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 26/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
ANTONY DOMINIC, J.
--------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 38053 of 2008
-------------------------------------
Dated this the 26[th] day of December, 2008
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
J U D G M E N T
Prayers sought for by the petitioners are for regularization of their services under the 1[st] respondent, invokingthe provisions of the Persons with Disabilities (Equal Opportunities,Protection of Rights and Full Participation) Act 1995. Petitionerssubmit that being handicapped persons, they are entitled to thebenefits of the Act and that their services under the 1[st] respondentare liable to e regularized on that basis. It is with this prayer thatthey have filed Ext.P4 before the 1[st] respondent and in this writpetition they seek an order requiring the 1st respondent to considerand pass orders on Ext.P4.
Having regard to the aforesaid facts, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 1[st] respondent to consider and pass orderson Ext.P4, if the said representation has been received and ispending. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any ratewithin 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment, along witha copy of the writ petition.
vi
(ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE)