Thomas Kurian vs Rehabilitation Plantation Ltd
2021 Latest Caselaw 959 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                     PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

     MONDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 21TH POUSHA, 1942

                          WP(C).No.12805 OF 2011(A)


PETITIONER:

               THOMAS KURIAN
               S/O.M.A.KURIAN,
               AGED 57 YEARS, MANAGER IN CHARGE (ESTATE),
               AYIRANALLOORE ESTATE, REHABILITATION PLANTATION LTD.,
               KOLLAM DISTRICT.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.ROY THOMAS
               SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)
               SRI.LAWRENCE D CUNHA

RESPONDENTS:

      1        REHABILITATION PLANTATION LTD.
               REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PUNALUR-691305.

      2        STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
               SECRETARY, (LABOUR DEPARTMENT), GOVERNMENT OF,
               KERALA, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

      3        THOMAS VECHUCHERUVIL,
               DEPUTY MANAGER (COMMERCIAL), R.P LTD.,
               HEAD OFFICE, PUNALUR-691305.

               R1   BY   ADV.   SMT.MARIAM MATHAI
               R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.M.PATHROSE MATTHAI SR.
               R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR
               R1   BY   ADV.   SRI.SAJI VARGHESE



               SRI. SUNIL KUMAR KURIAKOSE - GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD         ON
11.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.12805 OF 2011                       2

                                      JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

seeking a direction to the 1st respondent to

promote him as Manager (Estate) in the

retirement vacancy that arose on 30/04/2011 and

to restrain him from promoting the 3rd

respondent.

2. I notice that this matter was filed as

early as in the year 2011, but no orders have

been obtained by the petitioner from this Court

until now. In fact, after 17/10/2011, the

petitioner has not even moved this writ petition

for further hearing or orders.

I am, therefore, of the view that this writ

petition has now become stale on account of

efflux of time and that the prayers sought for

cannot be granted.

This writ petition is, therefore,

dismissed.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/12.1.2021

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT COMPANY

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE MANAGING DIRECTOR DATED 17.2.2010

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR RESOLUTION NO.10/2009

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 24.3.2011 RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

NIL


MC

                     (TRUE COPY)               PA TO JUDGE