Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

Rakesh vs Secretary

Rakesh vs Secretary

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Jan 23, 2024
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1299080

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Kerala High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
WP(C)/13811/2015

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

Rakesh

Respondent

Secretary

Excerpt

.....(civil) having come up for admission on 23.01.2024, the court on the same day delivered the following:p.v.kunhikrishnan, j.------------------------------------ w.p.(c)no.13811 of 2015 ------------------------------------- dated this the 23rd day of january, 2024judgmentthe above writ petition is filed with the following prayers; “(i) issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order to quash exhibit p2 and p3 notices issued by the respondents 1 and 2 respectively.(ii) issue such other writs, order or direction to deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” (sic)2. this writ petition is pending before thiscourt from 2015 onwards. the impugned orders in this case are ext.p2 and p3 notices. after going through the same, i think, there is nothing to interfere with the same. no interim order is also passed by this court. in such circumstances, this writ petition need not be retained here. the petitioner is free to agitate all the contentions raised in this writ petition before the authorities concerned, in accordance with law. with the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. sd/- p.v.kunhikrishnan nvj judge appendix of wp(c) 13811/2015 petitioner exhibitsexhibit p1: true copy of the spot verification report dated 29.4.2014 issued by the d.p.i., thiruvananthapuram. exhibit p2: true copy of the letter dated 6.2.2015 issued by the ist respondent to the 2nd respondent. exhibit p3: true copy of the notice in op no.373/2015 issued by the 2nd respondent. respondents exhibits : nil //true copy// pa to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JANUARY 2024 / 3RD MAGHA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 13811 OF 2015 PETITIONER: RAKESH AGED 40 YEARS, PRESIDENT, PALLICHAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV SRI.T.K.ANANDA KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: 1 SECRETARY GENERAL EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2 SECRETARY OMBUDSMAN FOR THE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, TRIDA BUILDING, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI BIJOY CHANDRAN, SR. GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 23.01.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.13811 of 2015 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 23rd day of January, 2024

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers; “(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ or order to quash Exhibit P2 and P3 notices issued by the respondents 1 and 2 respectively.

(ii) Issue such other writs, order or direction to deem fit and proper in the circumstances of the case.” (SIC)

2. This writ petition is pending before this

Court from 2015 onwards. The impugned orders in this case are Ext.P2 and P3 notices. After going through the same, I think, there is nothing to interfere with the same. No interim order is also passed by this Court. In such circumstances, this writ petition need not be retained here. The petitioner is free to agitate all the contentions raised in this writ petition before the authorities concerned, in accordance with law. With the above observation, this writ petition is disposed of. Sd/- P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN nvj JUDGE APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13811/2015 PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE SPOT VERIFICATION REPORT DATED 29.4.2014 ISSUED BY THE D.P.I., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 6.2.2015 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE IN OP NO.373/2015 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial