IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 22ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 3RD PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5650 of 2010(E) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.P.SAFIYA, W/O.MOHAMMED, VALAPPIL PAKKIKKANAKATH (H), MANGALAM AMSOM, KOOTAYI DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JAMSHEED HAFIZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, MANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DIST. 2. V.P.MAJEED, S/O.V.P.H.KOYA, VETTOTM AMSOM, RANDATHANI DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.5650 of 2010 (E) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 22nd day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner complains that the 2nd respondent is undertaking construction in violation of the Rules, and therefore, she made complaints to the 1st respondent resulting in Exts.P4 & P5 stop memos issued by the Panchayat. It is contended that despite the stop memos, ignoring the same, the 2nd respondent is proceeding with the construction. It is on this allegation this writ petition is filed praying for a direction to the 1st respondent to take appropriate action in the matter. 2. If as stated by the petitioner, the stop memos are in force, it is the duty of the 1st respondent to ensure that the same is complied with. The 1st respondent cannot leave the matter at rest after issuing the stop memos. 3. Therefore, I dispose of the writ petition directing that the 1st respondent shall take appropriate action for ensuring that the 2nd respondent complies with the stop memos, if the said memos are in WP(C) No.5650/2010 -2- force. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 1st respondent, who shall take necessary action in the matter. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg