Jolly Johnson vs The Commissioner
2024 Latest Caselaw 33294 Ker

Kerala High Court

Jolly Johnson vs The Commissioner on 15 November, 2024

                                               2024:KER:85880

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ

 FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2024 / 24TH KARTHIKA, 1946

                   WP(C) NO. 7935 OF 2020

PETITIONER:
          JOLLY JOHNSON
          AGED 71 YEARS
          W/O.LATE.C.V.JOHNSON,LICENCEEE ARD 170,
          CHIRAYANKANDATH HOUSE,ST.TOMAS LANE,
          ARANATTUKKARA.P.O,THRISSUR-680618.

         BY ADVS.
         P.SANKARANKUTTY NAIR
         SMT.V.K.REMASMRITHI
         SRI.SHANKAR V.
RESPONDENTS:
    1     THE COMMISSIONER
          CIVIL SUPPLIES CORPORATION,PUBLIC OFFICE
          BUILDING,MUSEUM,VIKAS BHAVAN.P.O,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-696033.

    2     THE TALUK SUPPLY OFFICER,
          CHEMBUKAVU,THRISSUR-680020.

    3     THE SOUTH INDIAN BANK LIMITED,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS AUTHORIZED OFFICER AND
          CHIEF MANAGER, REGIONAL OFFICE,THRISSUR-680001.


         BY ADVS.
         SUNIL SHANKER, STANDING COUNSEL FOR R3
         SRI.RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE,SENIOR GOVERNMENT
         PLEADER FOR R2.


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 15.11.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.7935 of 2020
                                      2


                                                                2024:KER:85880


                          P.M. MANOJ, J
                   -----------------------------------
                    W.P.(C) No.7935 of 2020
             ----------------------------------------------
         Dated this the 15th day of November, 2024


                                JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

"i) To call for records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P8 and P10 notices of the 2nd respondent and to issue a writ of certiorari quashing Exts.P8 &10 notices.

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other order directing the third respondent to allow the petitioner to function ARD 170.

(iii) Such other order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit on the facts and in the circumstances of the case".

When the matter is taken up for consideration today, It is

submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that, nothing

survives in the prayers sought for in the writ petition and can be

dismissed as infructuous. Accordingly, the writ petition is

dismissed as infructuous.

Sd/-

P.M.MANOJ JUDGE sss