IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 16TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 25TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 34418 of 2010(B) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ P.J.BABY, STAMP VENDOR, SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE, PANAMARAM P.O., WYNAD DISTRICT, PIN-670 721. BY ADVS. SRI.P.J.MATHEW, SRI.THOMAS JOHN AMBOOKEN. RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, FINANCE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, WYNAD CIVIL STATION, WYNAD DISTRICT - 673 517. 3. THE DISTRICT TREASURY OFFICER, KALPATTA NORTH, WYNAD DISTRICT - 673 572. 4. THE TAHASILDAR, MANANTHAVADY, WYNAD DISTRICT - 670 721. 5. C.N.DAMODARAN, STAMP VENDOR, MANANTHAVADY, WYNAD DISTRICT, PIN-670 721. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 34418 OF 2010 (B) ===================== Dated this the 16th day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner is a stamp vendor. He has approached this Court challenging Ext.P4. Ext.P4 is a notice issued on behalf of the 2nd respondent making reference to a report submitted by the 3rd respondent and calling upon the petitioner to show cause in the matter. 2. Petitioner mainly challenges the said notice on the ground that the notice has been issued in order to wreck vengeance on him for the proceedings that were initiated against the 5th respondent at his instance. It is stated that the respondents are bend upon punishing the petitioner and it was therefore that proceedings are now initiated against him. 3. As already stated, in this writ petition what is under challenge is Ext.P4. Petitioner has no case that the 2nd respondent lacks jurisdiction to issue the said notice. A reading of Ext.P4 also shows that a report has been submitted by the 3rd respondent making allegations against the petitioner. Therefore, there were certain allegations against the petitioner which is pending before WPC No. 34418/10 :2 : the 2nd respondent and it is perfectly within the jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent to have issued notice to the petitioner also. If that be so, it is for the petitioner to show cause in reply to Ext.P4 and challenge the final order if he is aggrieved by the said order. In that view of the matter, writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp