Rosily Ouseph vs The District Police Chief
2021 Latest Caselaw 10563 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

     MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                        WP(C).No.158 OF 2020(T)


PETITIONER/S:

                ROSILY OUSEPH
                W/O.OUSEPH, RESIDING AT PELLISSERY HOUSE,
                PELLISSERY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 027.

                BY ADVS.
                SRI.G.HARIHARAN
                SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
                SRI.V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR
                SMT.K.S.SMITHA

RESPONDENT/S:

      1         THE DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF
                KALYAN NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR,
                KERALA-680 003.

      2         SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
                CHERPU POLICE STATION,
                THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 561.

      3         ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD,
                (ROADS SUB DIVISION),
                THRISSUR-680 020.

      4         REGIONAL TRANSPORT OFFICER,
                AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 003.

      5         BOBAN CHAKKALAKAL,
                PALISSERY VILLAGE, PALISSERY P.O.,
                THRISSUR-680 027.

      6         AVINISSERY GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
                PALAKKAL, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 317,
                REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

      7         REGIONAL TRANSPORT AUTHORITY,
                THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
                PIN-680 001.
 WP(C).No.158 OF 2020(T)      2

             R6 BY ADV. SRI.VISHNUPRASAD NAIR

             SRI. P.P.THAJUDEEN, GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
29.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.158 OF 2020(T)                   3




                                        JUDGMENT

When this matter was taken up, Sri.G.Hariharan, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioner submitted that in terms of Ext.P6, bus stop has been

shifted and in that view of the matter, the petitioner has no further grievance.

This writ petition is closed.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

JUDGE IAP

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINANT DATED 21.06.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT AGAINST THE ILLEGAL ACTS OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINANT DATED 21.06.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST THE ILLEGAL ACTS OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINANT DATED 18.02.2018 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT AGAINST THE ILLEGAL ACTS OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF ONE SUCH COMPLAINT MADE BY THE PETITIONER AGAINST THE 5TH RESPONDENT ON 21.06.2018.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT MADE IN WPC NO.9641/2019 DATED 28.06.2019 BY THIS HON'BLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 7TH RESPONDENT MADE IN ITEM NO.162 OF ITS MEETING HELD ON 05.09.2019.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A TO JUDGE