IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN TUESDAY, THE 3RD NOVEMBER 2009 / 12TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 31230 of 2009(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ 1. SUNIL P. MANI, S/O. MANI, AGED 41, PUTHOOR CHENGAMATTATHIL HOUSE, MULAKULAM VILLAGE, PERUVA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. ULAHANNAN ABRAHAM, S/O.ABRAHAM, AGED 63, CHENGAMATTATHIL HOUSE, MULAKULAM VILLAGE, PERUVA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. ULAHANNAN VARGHESE, AGED 68 YEARS, CHENGAMATTATHIL HOUSE, MULAKULAM VILLAGE, PERUVA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 4. DINO KURIAN, S/O.KURIAN, AGED 30 YEARS, OTTOKUZHIYIL HOUSE, MULAKULAM VILLAGE, KUNNAPPILLY PERUVA P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 5. RAJAN, S/O. PAPPAN, AGED 40 YEARS, PADINJAREKEERIMATTOM, MULAKULAM VILLAGE, KARIKODE DESOM, KARIKODE P.O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 6. P.N.MOHANAN, S/O.NARAYANAN, AGED 50 YEARS, POOVATHINKAL HOUSE, KARIKODE P.O., KARIKODE DESOM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.GEORGE VARGHESE WP(C).No. 31230 of 2009 :: 2 :: RESPONDENT(S): ------------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.V.I.P.DIVISION, PIRAVOM. 3. SPECIAL TAHSILDAR, M.V.I.P., KURUPPAMTHARA, KOTTAYAM. BY GOV. PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J ------------------- W.P.(C).31230/2009 -------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT Sr.P.George Varghese, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners seeks permission to withdraw the writ petition reserving liberty with the petitioners to file a fresh writ petition incorporating appropriate reliefs instead of seeking a writ of prohibition as prayed for in the writ petition. In the light of the said submission and having regard to the fact that the petitioners cannot be blamed for seeking a wrong relief for which, in my opinion, the lawyer alone is responsible, I am inclined to grant the permission sought. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed as withdrawn, reserving liberty with the petitioners to file a fresh writ petition in relation to the same subject matter, seeking appropriate reliefs. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge mrcs