IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 29TH AUGUST 2008 / 7TH BHADRA 1930 WP(C).No. 26025 of 2008(W) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- M/S.KRISHNAN NAIR & SONS, PARTNERSHIP FIRM REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, JOSEPH DISILVA, S/O.ANTONY DISILVA, AGED 52, KRISHNAN NAIR & SONS, BROADWAY, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.SREEKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. CORPORATION OF COCHIN REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,COCHIN-11. 2. TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, COCHIN-11. 3. PENTA MENAKA OWNERS WELFARE ASSOCIATION, REG.NO.ER.371/2000, PENTA MENAKA BUILDINGS, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, KOCHI-31. BY SRI.S.RAMESH BABU, SC FOR CORPORATION SMT.S.ANEETHA, SC FOR R1 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/08/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C) No. 26025 OF 2008 W = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 29th day of August 2008 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that the 3rd respondent has made construction over a drainage and complaining of this, it is stated that Ext. P2 representation has been made before the 2nd respondent. It is stated that by Ext. P3 the same has been acknowledged. It is complaining inaction of the 2nd respondent this writ petition has been filed. 2. Having heard the counsel for the petitioner and also the Standing Counsel appearing for respondents 1 and 2, I feel that the grievance of the petitioner can be redressed by directing consideration of Ext. P2. 3. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to dispose of Ext. P2 as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC JUDGE jan/-