Being aggrieved of Ext.P1 notice issued by the 2nd respondent, the petitioner has preferred Ext.P2 appeal before the third respondent. The grievance of the petitioner is that, without any regard to the pendency of the appeal the respondents are proceeding with coercive steps to implement Ext.P1 and hence the writ petition.
2. Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.
3. In the course of further proceedings, the petitioner has produced Ext.P3 petition for condoning the delay and Ext.P4 petitioner for stay, along with I.A. No. 16287 of 2014, which are pending consideration before the third respondent. Considering the facts and circumstances, the third respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 delay condonation petition within 'one month' and if the delay is condoned, the appeal shall be considered and appropriate orders shall be passed after hearing the petitioner, at the earliest, at any W.P.C. No. 31393 of 2014 -2-
rate, within 'four months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Coercive proceedings, if any, shall be kept in abeyance till such time, subject to satisfaction of 1/3rd of the disputed liability within 'two weeks'.
The petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the concerned respondent for further steps. The writ petition is disposed of.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE.
kp/-