IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 1ST JUNE 2009 / 11TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 12819 of 2009(V) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SNEHATHEERAM ELDERS VILLAGE, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR DR.N.MADHU, CHERAI, COCHIN-683 514. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- PALLIPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OFFICE OF THE PALLIPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PALLIPURAM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.T.A.SHAJI FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX(WP(C)12819/2009) PETITIONER'S EXTS. EXT.P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE NOTICE ALONG WITH THE PROVISIONAL ORDER DTD. 17.2.2009. EXT.P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE EXPLANATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT, DTD. 21.2.2009. EXT.P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT DTD. 24.2.2009. lgk THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 12819 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 1st DAY OF JUNE, 2009 JUDGMENT The respondent has issued Ext.P1 notice, which is essentially a provisional order alleging different objections to a construction. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 reply to that. Without expressing anything on merits, this writ petition is ordered directing that Ext.P2 will be considered and a decision shall be issued in accordance with law, by the competent authority in the respondent, stating reasons, if the decision is against the interest of the petitioner, since in such event, the matter could be agitated before the competent statutory superior authorities. This writ petition is ordered accordingly, leaving open all other issues. Status quo as on today will continue until a decision is taken by the respondent. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/2/6