Dr.Arunmitra V.V vs The Principal
2021 Latest Caselaw 5598 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                               PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

     TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 27TH MAGHA,1942

                       WP(C).No.722 OF 2021(M)


PETITIONER:

               DR.ARUNMITRA V.V.,
               AGED 35 YEARS,
               VELUTHARA HOUSE, AROOKUTTY P.O., CHERTHALA,
               ALAPPUZHA-688 535.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.K.T.THOMAS
               SRI.MATHEW B.KURIAN

RESPONDENTS:

      1        THE PRINCIPAL,
               GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE, MULAMKUNNATHUKAVU,
               THRISSUR-680 581.

      2        THE MANAGER,
               DHANALAKSHMI BANK LTD,
               GOVERNMENT MEDICAL COLLEGE BRANCH, MULAMKUNNATHUKAVU,
               THRISSUR-680 581.

               BY ADVS. SMT.VINITHA.B, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
                        SRI.C.K.KARUNAKARAN, SC

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION           ON
16.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.722 OF 2021(M)

                                     2



                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is presently

working as Assistant Surgeon, claims that a

sum of Rs.50,000/- was given by him for the

purpose of installation of water purifiers

in the College, while he was functioning as

Chairman of College Students Union of the

Government Medical College, Thrissur in the

year 2008-09.

2. It is stated that so far the said

amount is not given to him, though the

Dhanalakshmi Bank, which had sponsored the

water purifiers, has remitted the amount in

the account of the Principal. Petitioner

claims that he is entitled to be paid the

said amount, which was utilised in the

emergent situation to see that the benefit

is not lost. Pointing out the same, WP(C).No.722 OF 2021(M)

petitioner has submitted Ext.P8

representation before the Principal of the

1st respondent.

3. The learned counsel for the

petitioner submitted that petitioner would

be satisfied with a direction to the 1st

respondent to consider the same and pass

orders.

In view of the limited relief sought,

the writ petition is disposed of with a

direction to the 1st respondent to consider

and pass orders on Ext.P8 representation,

within a period of two months from the date

of receipt of a copy of the judgment. It is

made clear that this Court has not gone into

the merits of the claim of petitioner.

Sd/-

P.V.ASHA JUDGE ww WP(C).No.722 OF 2021(M)

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF BILL DATED 04.03.2009 ISSUED BY BIO SYSTEMS & DEVICES.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF BILL DATED 04.03.2009 ISSUED BY BIO SYSTEMS & DEVICES.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF WARRANTY CARD DATED 04.03.2009 ISSUED BY BIO SYSTEMS & DEVICES.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 21.10.2009 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 21.11.2012 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 05.08.2014 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 23.07.2018 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD OF 1ST RESPONDENT.