IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN TUESDAY, THE 18TH AUGUST 2009 / 27TH SRAVANA 1931 WP(C).No. 3732 of 2008(T) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- M.M. PAULOSE, S/O. MATHAI, AGED 58 YEARS, MALAMPURATH HOUSE, VARIKKOLI P.O., PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SAJI VARGHESE KAKKATTUMATTATHIL SRI.S.SHYAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA. 3. THE SECRETARY, VADAVUCODE PUTHENCRUZ GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PUTHENCRUZ. 4. FATHIMA, W/O. BAVA, VATTAPPARA (H), KAITHAKKAD KARA, PATTIMATTOM VILLAGE. 5. V.P. BAVA, S/O. PAREED, VATTAPPARA (H), KAITHAKKAD KARA, PATTIMATTOM VILLAGE. ADV. SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY FOR R3 SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ FOR R5 SRI.M.AHAMED KUNJU FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.SMITHA SUKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 18/08/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C).No. 3732/2008. APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS P1. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.31.1.2004 BY R3. P2. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C).No. 4411/2004 OF THIS COURT. P3. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.8.3.04 BY R2. P4. COPY OF THE ORDER DTD.15.1.208 BY R1. Sdk+ ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.3732 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 18th day of August, 2009 J U D G M E N T The petitioner owns property adjacent to the property of respondents 4 and 5. The petitioner alleges that the 5th respondent is removing soil from his land in a large scale, which would injuriously affect the petitioner's property. The District Collector has granted Ext.P4 permission for such removal of sand. The petitioner filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P4 and seeking the following reliefs: “1) Call for the records relating to Ext.P1 to P4 from the 1st respondent. 2) Quash Ext.P4 Order by issuing a writ of certiorari or other appropriate writ direction or order. 3) Directing the 5th respondent to provide adequate compensation to the petitioner.” 2. I am not inclined to consider the matter on merits, since more than one-and-a-half years have elapsed since the writ petition was filed. There was no interim order. It is not disputed that Ext.P4 permission has worked itself out since the 5th respondent already removed the sand as per Ext.P4 permit. In the above circumstances, I dispose of this writ petition without prejudice to the right of the petitioner, if any, for claiming damages for injuries caused to his property on account of the alleged illegal removal of sand by the 5th respondent from his property adjacent to the petitioner's property. I W.P.C.3732/08 2 hasten to add that I have not considered the matter on merits and it is for the parties to prove and plead their cases before the appropriate forum. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge