BIJU RAMESH Vs. UNION OF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner is the managing partner of a hotel by name "Mythri" at Thiruvananthapuram. The petitioner claims that the petitioner has provided 4 star facilities in the said hotel. For obtaining 4 star classifications by the Tourism Department of the Government of India, the petitioner has filed Ext.P9 application before the 2nd respondent. The petitioner's grievance in this writ petition is that the same is not being considered by the 2nd respondent. I have heard the counsel for the petitioner, Central Government counsel appearing for the respondents as well as counsel appearing for the additional 4th respondent.

(2.) Having heard the parties, I dispose of this writ petition with a direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P9 application filed by the petitioner and pass orders thereon, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner as well as the additional 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within ten weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It would be open to all parties to rely on any material in support of their contentions, including Ext.P1 judgment, the applicability of which shall also be considered by the 2nd respondent while passing orders.