IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 8TH APRIL 2008 / 19TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 11965 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ ANTONY, S/O.PAILY, EDAPULAVAN HOUSE CHERANALLOOR KARA, KOOVAPPADY PANCHAYAT KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.RAJESH VIJAYAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM CIVIL STATION BUILDINGS, KAKKANAD, KOCHI-682 030. 2. ASSISTANT LABOUR OFFICER PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. SECRETARY, KOOVAPPADY GRAMA PANCHAYAT PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE KALADY POLICE STATION, KALADY. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 08/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, J. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ W.P.(C).No.11965/2008-Y ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Dated this the 8th day of April, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner's grievance is that the identity card which was issued in his favour by the second respondent for doing the work of collection of river sand in Kattunga-Manikathan Kadavu of Koovappady Panchayat was lost and that he has submitted an application before the Panchayat for issuance of a duplicate identity card. According to him, in connection with that application as directed by the Secretary of the Trade Union (C.I.T.U) to which he belongs, the petitioner had subscribed his signatures into a blank paper. As he was waiting for the duplicate card to be issued, he came to know that somebody else is using his lost identity card by affixing a different photograph to the same. According to him, he has not given his consent to anybody to work as kadavu worker by using his identity card. The petitioner has filed a complaint, Ext.P3, before the District Collector and an identical complaint before the Secretary of the Panchayat. His grievance is that no action is being taken either by the District Collector or by the Panchayat on that complaint. He has filed this writ petition with the following prayers:- WP(C) No.11965/2008-Y -:2:- “A. This petitioner is having every right to work with the Identity Card issued to him. The Identity Card is not transferable and non else other than the petitioner can use and work with the strength of this Identity Card. In the circumstance the authorities has to be viewed very seriously since the matter is involved impersonation which is a serious criminal offence. B. The respondents are duty bound to conduct enquiry regarding the labour conditions and whether any malpractice is going on in this field. Though this petitioner preferred several representations, no action has been taken by the respondents in this regard. The only income for the poor family of this petitioner is from this job and at present because of the malpractice and misuse of the Identity Card this petitioner is not in a position to work in the Kadavu and another person by using the Identity Card is working in that same Kadavu with the help of respondents and political leaders.” 2. Considering the averments in the writ petition and the submissions of Sri.Rajesh Vijayan, counsel for the petitioner, I am of the view that even without issuing notice to the respondents, writ petition can be disposed of in the following terms:- If the third respondent has already received any complaint from the petitioner regarding misuse of his identity card, the third respondent will conduct necessary enquiries and take such action as is warranted, on the basis of the facts revealed by the enquiry. Needful in the above regard shall be done at the earliest and at any rate within one month from the date of receiving a copy of this judgment. PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, Judge ms