NARAYANANKUTTY MENON Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner in this review petition has sought for a review of the judgment dated 4-11-2008, essentially with regard to the observations made in the judgment in the writ petition, "as to the absence of a suitable statutory frame work for dealing with cases of mentally retarded persons both in the context of appointing a guardian for management of the person and the property of the mentally retarded person or for any other ancillary purpose dealing with the person and properties in that regard."

(2.) After having observed so, this Court also proceeded to exercise the jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The writ petition was filed alleging that one Sunilkumar, son of late Mudakodi Chandrasekhara Menon and late Mulappilli Kamalamma is a mentally retarded person. Certain items of properties were obtained by Chandrasekhara Menon and Kamalamma from their respective tarwards. Chandrasekhara Menon died on 24-3-1995; the mentally retarded person was being looked after by his father till his death. It was also noted that Kamalamma, the mother of Sunilkumar developed some mental illness at the time of Sunilkimar's childhood. She was also being looked after by her husband. One Govindankutty Menon was looking after the person and property of both Kamalamma and Sunilkumar. He was appointed as the Guardian by the District Court, Ernakulam in O.P. No. 429/05. Govindankutty Menon also died. In the meanwhile, the District Court had rejected an application filed by a stranger for appointing him as the guardian of Sunilkumar. The present writ petition was filed by Narayanankutty Menon, son of the aforementioned Govindankutty Menon, to be appointed as the guardian of the person and property of Sunilkumar.

(3.) The District Collector had forwarded a report to the Register (Judicial), pursuant to an interim order passed by this Court opining that the petitioner has a good financial background and he is also having the privilege of being an uncle, to protect Sri. Sunilkumar. This Court had issued an interim order on 24-7-2008, after admitting the writ petition, inter alia, requiring the petitioner to take out a paper publication as regards the pendency of the writ petition and also be enable any interested person to oppose the prayer made in the writ petition. No person came forward to oppose the writ petition.