R.Balaram Sait vs The Project Director Sted Project ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 6555 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                   PRESENT
           THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN
     TUESDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JUNE 2023 / 23RD JYAISHTA, 1945
                          WP(C) NO. 29033 OF 2008
PETITIONER/S:

            R.BALARAM SAIT, ASST. PROJECT CO-ORDINATOR,,
            (ACCOUNTS & ADMINISTRATION), AKSHYA PROJECT,
            CORPORATION BUILDING,, ANDAMUKKOM, KOLLAM. R/A
            VAZHOTTUPADINJATTATHIL(H), KAIKULANGARA NORTH,
            CUTCHERRY.P.O, KOLLAM-13.

             BY ADV SRI.G.JOSEPH


RESPONDENT/S:

     1       THE PROJECT DIRECTOR, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
             ENTERPRENEURSHIP,, DEVELOPMENT (STED), PROJECT (A
             GOVT. OF KERALA, UNDER TAKING) 5TH FLOOR, KALLAI
             ROAD,, KOZHIKODE - 673 002.

     2       THE DIRECTOR, AKSHAYA PROJECT, (A GOVT. OF KERALA
             PROJECT), AKSHAYA STATE PROJECT OFFICE, ALTHARA JN,,
             VELLAYAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 033.

     3       THE CHIEF CO-ORDINATOR OF AKSHAYA PROJECT/THE
             DISTRICT COLLECTOR,, COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM-13.

     4       THE ASSISTANT DISTRICT CO-ORDINATOR, AKSHAYA PROJECT
             OFFICE, CORPORATION BUILDING, ANDAMUKKOM, KOLLAM-1.

     5       THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT OF KERALA
             INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
             SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1.

            BY ADVS.SRI.BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA
            SRI.C.P.SIVADASAN NAIR


         THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   13.06.2023,    THE    COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 29033 OF 2008

                                      ..2..

                                    JUDGMENT

The writ petition is filed for quashing Ext.P7

and for directions, permitting the petitioner to

continue in service in the same post in the same

office as if his resignation has already been

withdrawn by the petitioner himself.

2. On 22.11.2017, when the case was taken up

for hearing, it was reported that the counsel for the

petitioner expired and accordingly, the Registry was

directed to issue notice to the petitioner. Notice

was issued to the petitioner as directed. It is seen

that no fresh vakalath has been filed for the

petitioner thereafter; and since then, no

representation for the petitioner. Due to passage of

time, the petitioner might have lost interest in

prosecuting the matter.

Hence, the writ petition is dismissed for

default.

Sd/-

SHOBA ANNAMMA EAPEN

JUDGE bka/-