IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 10TH NOVEMBER 2006 / 19TH KARTHIKA 1928 WP(C).No. 29641 of 2006(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ KANNIKUMAR, SON OF NAMBI REDDY, 35/581, ABHIRAMI JUNCTION, PALARIVATTOM, KOCHI-25. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SMT.ANALAKHUSI BHASKAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL AUTHORITIES DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REP. BY THE SECRETARY, COCHIN. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, ZONAL OFFICE, EDAPPALLY, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV.SRI.RAMESH BABU, SC, COCHIN CORPORATION THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/11/2006, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE,J. ``````````````````````````` W.P.(C) NO. 29641 OF 2006 ``````````````````````````` Dated this the 10th day of November, 2006 J U D G M E N T Sri.Ramesh Babu, standing counsel takes notice on behalf of the 2nd respondent. Smt.Analakhusibhaskar, counsel for the petitioner submits that it is totally ignoring Exhibit P3 order passed by the Tribunal that the Corporation has now issued Exhibits P3 and P4. Exhibit P3 is a hearing notice which obviously has been issued in response to the directions in Exhibit P2. Petitioner seems to be aggrieved by Exhibit P4 by which the corporation has directed the petitioner to produce certain documents. I do not know why the petitioner should be aggrieved by Exhibit P4. The learned standing counsel for the Corporation has assured me that the Corporation will faithfully comply with all the directions in Exhibit P3 order before taking a final decision. This submission is recorded and writ petition is disposed of accordingly. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE Rp