IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2010 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 8683 of 2010(I) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.V.PAULOSE, AGED 67, S/O. VAREED, PAYYAPPILLIL HOUSE, KAVARAMPARAMBU, NAYATHODU.P.O, ANGAMALY VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.PRAMOD KOCHUTHOMMEN.E. RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, FORT KOCHI. 2. THAHSILDAR, ALUVA. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, ANGAMALY. 5. JOSE, AGED 46, S/O. MANI, KOTTAKKAL HOUSE, KAVARAPARAMBU, NAYATHODU.P.O, ANGAMALY VILLAGE, ALUVA TALUK. GOVENRMENT PLEADER, SHRI P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.8683/2010-I ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 17th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is in possession of 15.69 ares of land which is lying as a paddy field in Angamaly Village. The fourth respondent is alleged to be making certain constructions in the nearby paddy field which compelled the petitioner to move the Revenue Divisional Officer by filing Ext.P3 representation seeking for appropriate action in the matter. Alleging that the respondents are not taking any action in the matter and that the fourth respondent is continuing with the proposed construction, this writ petition has been filed. 2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that the Village Officer, after inspection, has issued a stop memo dated 11/03/2010 and the first respondent has called for a report in the matter also. 3. In the light of the fact that respondent Nos.1 to 3 are already seized of the matter, further action will be taken in accordance with law. The petitioner can approach the first respondent as and when notice is issued and he can also produce materials before the Revenue Divisional W.P.(C). No.8683/2010 -:2:- Officer. The fourth respondent will be heard in the matter before final orders are passed. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms