P.A.BASHEER, POOTHANAL HOUSE v. STATE OF KERALA
Case at a glance
- Decided
- 09 Jan 2008
- Bench
- PIUS C KURIAKOSE
Provisions considered
Judgment
BY ADV. SRI.K.GEORGE VARGHESE KANNANTHANAM SRI.TONY GEORGE KANNANTHANAM RESPONDENTS: ----------------
STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LAW DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
THE SECRETARY, PAIPRA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MUVATTUPUZHA, PEZHACKAPPILLY P.O. ADDL.
MANI, S/O.AZHAKAN, AGED 34, CHIRAYIL HOUSE, PEZHAKKAPPILLY KARA, MALAVOOR VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK. (IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER ON IA NO.13531/04 DT.8.10.04) BY ADV. SRI.K.P.SATHEESAN SRI.K.K.GOPINATHAN NAIR SRI.BASIL MATHEW THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP No.11605 OF 2003 ORDER ON CMP No. 20005 OF 2003 IN OP No. 11605 OF 2003 DISMISSED
09.01.2008 SD/- PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: APPENDIX EXT.P1 : TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.A 2338/98 DT.14.3.03 ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P2 : TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.A 2338/98 DT.14.3.03 ISSUED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P3 : TRUE COPY OF ORDER DT.10TH JULY 2001 PASSED BY THE OMBUDSMAN IN OP (SM) No.320/2000. EXT.P4 : TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT DT.22.8.2000 FILED BEFORE THE OMBUDSMAN. EXT.P5 : TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO.A2 238/98 DT.14.3.2003 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P6 : TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION DT.16.6.98 ISSUED FROM THE SECRETARY, PAIPRA GRAMA PANCHAYAT. 2ND RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R2(A) : TRUE COPY OF LETTER OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE OMBUDSMAN WITH HIS REPLY ENFORSED THEREON DT.29.05.03. 3RD RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R3(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO.44008/01/9B DT.12.10.98. EXT.R3(B) : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.220/97/LAD DT.2.10.97. EXT.R3(C) : TRUE COPY OF THE SCHEME FOR THE YEAR 1998-99 PUBLISHED BY PAYIPARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXT.R3(D) : TRUE COPY OF THE GUIDELINE PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT. EXT.R3(E) : TRUE COPY OF THE AMENDED GUIDELINES PUBLISHED BY THE GOVERNMENT. /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ------------------------------- O.P. No. 11605 OF 2003 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of January, 2008 JUDGMENT The only ground raised in this Original Petition in which Ext.P3 order of the Ombudsman is impugned, is that the successor Ombudsman (Justice K.P. Radhakrishna Menon) is not competent to sign the order which had been prepared by the predecessor Ombudsmen(Justice Muhammed and Sri.D.Babu Paul). The situation is covered by Rule 2 of Order XX CPC. I do not find any impropriety in the successor Ombudsman signing the order which had been prepared by the predecessor Ombudsmen, but not pronounced by them. At the same time I am of the view that the impugned order warrants modification to the extent of making Smt. Anna also liable for the payment of amounts. Since Smt. Anna is not a party to this Original Petition, I am not inclined to modify the order. I dismiss the Original Petition, however, giving liberty to the petitioner to approach the Ombudsman for getting necessary modification to Ext.P3 order so as to make Smt. Anna also liable for the amounts. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE WPC 2
Questions this judgment answers
Which statutory provisions did this judgment involve?
Code of Civil Procedure, 1908.
Which court decided this case, and when?
Kerala High Court, on 09 Jan 2008. The bench was PIUS C KURIAKOSE.
Precedent status how later indexed judgments have treated this case
No known negative treatment found in the Courts & Cases corpus.
This is a result about the indexed corpus, not a finding that the judgment remains good law. Coverage may be incomplete.