IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 11TH AUGUST 2011 / 20TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21867 of 2011(G) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. C.N.USHA DEVI, AGED 53 YEARS, W/O.RAJU, LANKARA VEETTIL, KOOROPPADA P.O., PAMBADY VIA., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. K.N.SURESH, S/O.NARAYANA PANICKER, VRINDAVAN, KOOROPPADA P.O., PAMBADY VIA., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, COLLECTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM-686002. 2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KOOROPPADA VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686502. 3. KOOROPPADA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KOOROPPADA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686502. 4. THE GEOLOGIST, DISTRICT MINING AND GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT, KOTTAYAM-686001. GOVT.PLEADER SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.21867/11 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS EXT.P1: PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE HOUSES OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P3: PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE VISION FROM THE 1ST PETITIONER'S HOUSE. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT ON 31.5.2011. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.6.11 MADE BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE A.D. CARD DATED 16.6.2011 FOR RECEIPT OF EXT.P5 BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 14.6.11 FOR RECEIVING EXT.P5. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 21867 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 11th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T The limited prayer of the petitioners is for a direction to the 1st respondent to consider Ext.P5, a complaint made by the petitioners alleging large scale removal of soil by the Panchayat in a property which is adjacent to their residential property. According to the petitioners, such removal is without obtaining permit of the Geologist, and that, if it materialises, it will result in the petitioners losing lateral support to their residential building. 2. In the nature of dispute, the issue required factual adjudication, which this Court cannot do. Since Ext.P5 complaint made by the petitioners is pending before the 1st respondent, I leave it open to the 1st respondent to adjudicate the grievance of the petitioners with notice to the 3rd respondent Panchayath. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition, without expressing anything on the merits and directing the 1st respondent to decide on Ext.P5 with notice to the parties concerned and as WPC No. 21867/11 :2 : expeditiously as possible, on the production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp