Mathukutty Xavier vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 16412 Ker

Kerala High Court

Mathukutty Xavier vs State Of Kerala on 11 June, 2024

Author: P Gopinath

Bench: P Gopinath

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE GOPINATH P.
  TUESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 21ST JYAISHTA, 1946
                      WP(C) NO. 797 OF 2014
PETITIONER:

         MATHUKUTTY XAVIER
         S/O.MATHEW XAVIER,THACHEDATHU HOUSE,KARUNAPURAM
         KARA,UDUPANCHOLA,IDUKKI,CHETTUKUZHAI.P.O.

         BY ADV SRI.T.RAJESH


RESPONDENTS:

    1    STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY,GOVERNMENT
         SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

    2    K.N.SASIDHARAN
         TAHSILDAR,PEERUMEDU,NOW RESIDING AT KALIYANA
         HOUSE,THANNIMOODU,PARATHODU,UDUMBANCHOLA,IDUKKI-
         685584.

    3    MONCY VARGHESEU.D.CLERK
         LAND ASSIGNMENT OFFICE SPECIAL VILLAGE
         OFFICER,PEEDIYAKKAL VEEDU,UDUMBANCHOLA
         TALUK,NEDUMKANDUM,IDUKKI-685553.

    4    M.R.SATHEESH CHANDRANFIRST GRADE SURVEYOR
         NEDUMKANDAM TALUK OFFICE,NEDUMKANDAM-685553.

    5    PURUSHOTHAMAN NAIRKARUNAPURAM VILLAGE OFFICER
         THAIMADATHIL HOUSE,NEDUMKANDAM TALUK,NEDUMKANDAM-
         685553.

 ADDL.R6 THOMAS XAVIOUR,S/O. XAVIER, AGED 47 YEARS,
         THACHEDATHU HOUSE, CHETTUKUZHYKARA,KARUNAPURAM
         VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI

 ADDL.R7 ROJAN XAVIER, S/O.XAVIOUR, AGED 45 YEARS,
         THACHEDATHU HOUSE, CHETTUKUZHYKARA, KARUNAPURAM
         VILLAGE, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI

         ADDL.R6 AND R7 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
         DT.17/11/2014 IN I.A.15405/14 IN THE WP(C).
 W.P.(C)No.797/2014                       2

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.GEORGE MATHEWS
            SRI.P.BHARATHAN
            SMT.CELINE JOSEPH
            SRI.T.T.RAKESH


OTHER PRESENT:

            SMT. THUSHARA JAMES (SR GP)


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.06.2024,     THE   COURT   ON   THE       SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.797/2014                       3

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court being aggrieved by the

fact that an application filed by the petitioner seeking sanction to

prosecute respondents 2 to 5 has not been considered by the 1 st

respondent.

2. The learned senior Government Pleader on instructions

would submit that, in so far as the application for sanction to prosecute

respondents 2, 3 and 5 is concerned, the application was considered by

the competent authority and the same was rejected on 6.5.2015. It is

submitted that the application for sanction to prosecute the 4 th

respondent was also considered by the competent authority and the

same was rejected on 22.7.2015.

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the 3 rd respondent

also.

Having considered the contentions raised and having regard to the

submissions made by the learned senior Government Pleader, I am of

the view that the reliefs sought for in this writ petition have become

infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/-

GOPINATH P. JUDGE acd

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 797/2014

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXT.P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT LOADGED BEFORE THE VIGILANCE COURT AS CRL.M.A.1175 OF 2013.

EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING SANCTION TO PROSECUTE RESPONDENTS 2,4 AND

EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER SEEKING SANCTION TO PROSECUTE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.