S.Ramachandran vs The District Collector
2022 Latest Caselaw 5996 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
   TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2022 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                      WP(C) NO. 14533 OF 2022


PETITIONER:

            S.RAMACHANDRAN
            AGED 36 YEARS
            S/O C.R SUBRAMANIAN, SREEVIDYA BHAVAN,
            MALAVATTOM THIRUVILWAMALA P.O, THRISSUR-680588
            PRESIDENT, PARAKKOTTUKAVU THALAPOLI COMMITTEE
            KIZHAKKUMURI DESAM, THIRUVILWAMALA,
            THRISSUR-680588
            BY ADV L.RAJESH NARAYAN

RESPONDENTS:

    1       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
            FIRST FLOOR, CIVIL STATION, CIVIL LINES RD,
            KALYAN NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680003
    2       DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
            DISTRICT POLICE OFFICE, THRISSUR- 680003
    3       ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
            ADDITIONAL DISTRICT MAGISTRATE,
            COLLECTORATE CIVIL STATION, THRISSUR -680003
    4       SECRETARY,
            DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL POLICY AND PROMOTION
            MINISTRY OF COMMERCE AND INDUSTRY,
            UDYOG BHAVAN, NEW DELHI110011
    5       DEPUTY CHIEF CONTROLLER OF EXPLOSIVES PETROLEUM
            AND EXPLOSIVES SAFETY ORGANISATION(PESO)
            KENDRIYA BHAVAN, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM- 682 037
OTHER PRESENT:

            SRI.MANU.S, ASGI,
            SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP


     THIS     WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION     ON   31.05.2022,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.14533/2022

                                   2




                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                    --------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.14533 of 2022
             ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 31st day of May, 2022


                           JUDGMENT

When this writ petition came up for consideration,

the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in

the light of the interim order passed by this Court,

prayers in this writ petition are infructuous.

Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed as

infructuous, recording the interim order passed in this

case.

sd/-

                                             P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV                                                  JUDGE