IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 13TH DECEMBER 2007 / 22ND AGRAHAYANA 1929 WP(C).No. 36826 of 2007(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ 1. P.SULAIMAN HAJI, S/O.MOOSA, RESIDING AT 'PUTHUKOTTU', POYYOLI POST, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE. 2. KANARAN, S/O.KANNAN, RESIDING AT THEEKODI POST, (VIA) MELADI, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE. 3. AYSHA, W/O.KASMI, RESIDING AT AYYANDA VALAPPIL, K.C.VILLA, P.O.MELADI, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE. 4. JAVED AHAMMED, RESIDING AT CHULIODE ROAD, CHEVAYUR AMSOM AND DESOM, BADAGARA. 5. CHOYI, RESIDING AT VADAKKE VALAPPIL HOUSE, P.O.MELADI, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE. 6. KHAMARUNNISA, D/O.ASSAINAR, RESIDING AT MELADI AMSOM AND DESOM, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE. 7. IBRAHIMKUTTY @ IBRAYI, RESIDING AT UTHURIPARAMBIL, THIKODI VILLAGE, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.K.JAYAKUMAR SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, QUILANDY, KOZHIKODE. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THIKKODI VILLAGE, QUILANDY TALUK, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/12/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C) 36826 of 2007 ------------------------------------- Dated: December 13, 2007 JUDGMENT Exts.P1 to P5 are notices issued to the petitioners except petitioners 4 and 6. It is submitted that petitioners 4 and 6 also have received similar notices requiring them to vacate the premises. According to the petitioners before they could take recourse to any legal remedy, Exts.P1 to P5 orders and similar orders that were served on petitioners 4 and 6 were implemented. It is stated that aggrieved by these orders, petitioners filed Exts.P9 to P15 which were also served on the 1st respondent as well. It is in this background the writ petition has been filed for a direction that orders be passed by the 2nd respondent on Exts.P9 to P15. 2. Having regard to the fact that Exts.P1 to P5 and similar other notices served on petitioners 4 and 6 have already been implemented, I do not think that any useful purpose could be served by directing the 2nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Exts.P9 to P15. WP(C) 36826/2007 Page numbers 3. Since copies of Exts.P9 to P15 have also been served on the 1st respondent, I direct that the 1st respondent shall consider Exts.P9 to P15 with notice to the petitioners and pass orders thereon. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within six weeks of receipt of a copy of this judgment. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mt/-