IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST JULY 2008 / 10TH ASHADHA 1930 WP(C).No. 19809 of 2008(G) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ----------------- 1. BOBAKUMAR.T.N., THARAYIL HOUSE, CHERUKARA P.O., KAVALAM, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. P.T.SKARIAH, S/O.KURUVILA THOMAS, SOCIAL WORKER, AGED 51, RESIDING AT PALLATHUSERRY, NARAKATHARA P.O., VIA.KAVALAM, ALAPPUZHA DIST. 3. P.ANANAD KURUP, MAMPAZHA HOUSE, EAST CHENNAMKARY P.O., KAVALAM, ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. SRIR.AZAD BABU RESPONDENTS: -------------------- 1. SECRETARY, NEELAMPEROOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, EARA P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. 2. SECRETARY, VELIYANADU BLOCK PANCHAYAT, RAMANKARI P.O., ALAPPUZHA. 3. PROJECT OFFICER, DISTRICT RURAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY (DRDA), NEAR COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA. 4. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVT., LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. COMMISSIONER, DEPARTMENT OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. DIRECTOR, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA, MINISTRY OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LAND RESOURCES, NEW DELHI 110 011. BY SRI. P. PARAMESWARAN NAIR – ASST. SOLI. GENERAL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 01/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.19809 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of July, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioners are inhabitants of the Kuttanadu area, where according to them, the Union Ministry for Rural Development is implementing a project by name “Hariyali” with effect from 2005. The petitioners' complaint in this writ petition is that the supporting agency under the Scheme has formulated Ext.P3 work details which is inconsistent with the objectives of Ext.P1 project, under which the Ministry has implemented the said project. The petitioners therefore filed a complaint before the 6th respondent which is produced as Ext.P9. The petitioner seeks a direction to the 6th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9 expeditiously. 2. I have heard the learned Asst. Solicitor General also. After hearing both sides, I am of opinion that the 6th respondent can be directed to consider and pass orders on Ext.P9. This the 6th respondent shall do as expeditiously as W.P.(c)No.19809/08 2 possible, at any rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd