Biju B.R vs The K.S.R.T.C
2022 Latest Caselaw 1972 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                          PRESENT
     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
               TH
 FRIDAY, THE 18   DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 29TH MAGHA, 1943

                  WP(C) NO. 18439 OF 2012

PETITIONER/S:

    1      BIJU B.R.
           AGED 29 YEARS
           SON OF BALAN, VARADA HOUSE,
           PALLIPRAM, P.O.PERINGADI, PIN-673 312.

    2      DEEP.K.R.
           SON OF REMANAN.K.P,
           KULANGARAYIL HOUSE, AKKARAPPADOM,
           VAIKOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

    3      JIBIN DEVASSY
           SON OF DEVASSY, CHOOLAKKAL HOUSE,
           NEENDOOR, VADAKAKARA.P.O.,
           NORTH PARUR, PIN-683 522.

    4      PRAMOD.P.
           SON OF PURUSHAN.K,
           PRAVEEN NIVAS, KAROOR, AMBALAPUZHA.P.O.,
           ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

           BY ADVS.
           SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.)
           SRI.S.M.PRASANTH

RESPONDENT/S:

    1      THE K.S.R.T.C.
           REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
           TRANSPORT BHAVAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

    2      STATE OF KERALA
           REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
           DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORT, GOVERNMENT OF KERALA,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.
 WP(C) NO. 18439 OF 2012

                             2



    3      THE KERALA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION
           REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PATTOM,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 004.

    4      SRI.LINRAJ
           DAMARIOUS MANDIRAM, PARANCODE.P.O.,
           THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 542.

    5      SRI.SANTHOSH.S.
           THAKADIYEL HOUSE, THRIKODITHANAM.P.O., CHANGANACHERRY-686
           105.

    6      SRI.PREMJI
           LALITHAMA NIVAS, VAZHAPULLY.P.O.,
           CHANGANACHERRY-686 103.

           BY ADV SRI.P.C.SASIDHARAN, SC, KPSC




     THIS WRIT PETITION     (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP      FOR
ADMISSION ON 18.02.2022,    THE COURT ON THE SAME       DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18439 OF 2012

                                     3




                               JUDGMENT

When this writ petition was taken up, Sri. S.M. Prasanth, the

learned counsel appearing for the petitioners submitted that the prayer

sought for in this writ petition has become infructuous.

In that view of the matter, this writ petition is dismissed as

infructuous.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE

avs