IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI MONDAY, THE 11TH OCTOBER 2010 / 19TH ASWINA 1932 WP(C).No. 29938 of 2010(N) ------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------------- C.M.VERGHIS, AGED 76, S/O.THOMAS MAMMEN, BUILDING NO.24/392, CHANDRAVIRUTHIL CALIPSO KACHERY JN., THIRUVALLA. BY ADV. SRI.T.P.PRADEEP RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. 688 605. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, THIRUVALLA, PATHANAMTHITTA DIST. 3. THIRUVALLA MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.688 605 4. G.RAJASEKHARAN, VISHNAVATHIL, MUTHOOR P.O., THIRUVALLA. 688 610. 5. DY.SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THIRUVALLA. 688 605 6. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, PATHANAMTHITTA. 688 605. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI T.K. VIPINDAS. ADV. SRI.S.SUBHASH CHAND, SC.THIRUVALLA MUNC FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/10/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.M. JOSEPH & M. C. HARI RANI, JJ. ----------------------------------------- W.P.(C).NO. 29938 OF 2010 N ------------------------------------------ Dated this the 11th October, 2010. JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. The prayers in the Writ Petition are as follows: i) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents 5 and 6 to provide adequate police protection to the life and property of the petitioner and his family members. ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents 1 and 2, not to harass the petitioner and not to give protection to the 4th respondent for carrying out the unauthorised construction. Iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding respondents 5 and 6 to take action against respondent 1 and 2 for their misdeeds. WP(C).NO.29938 OF 2010 N 2 iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding 3rd respondent to comply with Ext.P2 and P3 orders of the Tribunal and to take action against the unauthorized construction carried out by the 4th respondent. v) Direct the 3rd respondent to initiate action to prosecute 4th respondent as contemplated in Sec.406 (4) of Kerala Municipality Act.” 2. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader and also the learned counsel appearing for the third respondent Municipality. Learned Government Pleader would submit that there is a Plan approved by the third respondent Municipality on 14.8.2010 and the fourth respondent is putting up the pit in terms of the Plan. Learned counsel for the petitioner seeks permission to withdraw the Writ Petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to challenge the said Order. The Writ petition is dismissed as withdrawn without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek appropriate remedies in the appropriate WP(C).NO.29938 OF 2010 N 3 Forum, if he is so advised, including to challenge the issuance of the Permit issued by the third respondent. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.C. HARI RANI, JUDGE kbk. //True copy// PS to Judge