BASHEER MATHER Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER in W.P(C). 14957/06 is the appellant. The issue raised in the writ petition was the legality of Exts. P6 and P7 orders passed by the Government and the District Supply Officer respectively. The controversy in this writ petition is in relation to the appointment of ARD No. 141 of Ranni taluk. By Ext. P7 order, the 5th respondent was appointed as the ARD and it was this order, which was challenged in the writ petition. In the judgment under appeal, learned single Judge held that the appellant was ineligible and the application made by the 5th respondent was also defective. On that basis, learned single Judge ordered the respondents to invite applications afresh for appointment. It is this judgment, which is under challenge before us.

(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the parties and considered the submissions.

(3.) THE 5th respondent challenged the above proceedings in O.P. 21334/97 before this Court. That OP was disposed of by Ext. P5 judgment, directing the Government to reconsider the revision filed by the 5th respondent in the light of the principles laid down by this Court in Varkey v. State of Kerala (1984 KLT 567). The Government considered the matter afresh and by Ext. P6 order, remitted the matter to the DSO for fresh consideration. It was accordingly that the DSO reconsidered the matter and issued Ext. P7 order, whereby, the 5th respondent was appointed. It was in these circumstances, the appellant filed the writ petition challenging Exts. P6 and P7.