IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN MONDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2007 / 4TH ASHADHA 1929 WP(C).No. 3322 of 2007(U) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER: ----------------- GEORGE THOMAS, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. LATE M.M.THOMAS, MULARICKAL VALIYAVEETTIL, CHERAI, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE SRI.V.MANOJ KUMAR SRI.VARUGHESE M EASO SMT.PRAISHEEL PRAKASAM SRI.VIVEK VARGHESE P.J. SRI.K.B.ARUN RESPONDENTS: ---------------------- 1. KERALA STATE SMALL INDUSTRIES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD., REPRESENTED BY MANAGING DIRECTOR, HOUSING BOARD BUILDINGS, SANTHI NAGAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. ESTATE MANAGER, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, KALLITUMKARA, TRICHUR DISTRICT. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, INDUSTRIAL DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.A.MANHU, SC, SIDCO GOVERNMETN PLEADER SRI.I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2007, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. -------------------------- W.P.(C)NO.3322 OF 2007 ------------------------- DATED THIS THE 25th DAY OF JUNE, 2007 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P15 show cause notice directing the petitioner to show cause as to why the plot allotted to the petitioner should not be resumed for non use. In so far as Ext.P15 is only a show cause notice, I am not inclined to entertain this writ petition at this stage since the petitioner can file reply to the show cause notice and attempt to convince the respondents that the land is not liable to be resumed. The petitioner submits that he has already filed a reply which is disputed by the learned standing counsel for the 1st respondent. There need not be any controversy regarding this. The petitioner may file another objection to Ext.P15 within one week and the 1st respondent shall take a decision pursuant to Ext.P15 expeditiously. The Writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd