IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST JULY 2010 / 30TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13330 of 2004(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- REETHAMMA SEBASTIAN, W/O. POULOSE, ANITHOTTATHIL HOUSE, THEKKINTHANDU, BYSON VALLEY VILLAGE, MURICKASSERY P.O., UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.VIJAYAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, P.W.D. ROAD SECTION, SANTHANPARA, IDUKKI DIST. 3. MR.ISSAC, P.W.D. CONTRACTOR, RAJAKKADU, THEKKINKANAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. RAJAKKADU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, RAJAKKADU, UDUMBANCHOLA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. ADDL. R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 31-5-2004 IN I.A.6513/04. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. V. MANU. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) FOR R3 SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM FOR R3 SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAY FOR R4 SMT.N.SANTHA FOR R4 SRI.K.A.BALAN FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/07/2010, THE COURT, ON THE SAME DAY, DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W.P(C) No. 13330 of 2004 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 21st day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T In this writ petition, a learned Judge of this Court had passed an interim order dated 1-7-2009 as follows: “Heard. The petitioner submits, her property is sought to be encroached into, under the guise of widening and tarring a road. The official respondent would submit that the petitioner has given an undertaking to the 3rd respondent that she has no objection in tarring the road as proposed. Basically, whether the petitioner has given an undertaking as stated above or whether any encroachment was made into her property while tarring the road, is a matter which can be decided only by a competent civil court. Therefore, a feel that there is no justification for continuing the interim order. Accordingly, it is vacated, without prejudice to the rights, if any, of the petitioner to move the appropriate civil court for appropriate reliefs.” The same contains the facts of the case and in fact conclusively disposes of the writ petition itself. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of in terms of the interim order, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to approach the appropriate civil court for redressing her grievances. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/ [TRUE COPY] P.S TO JUDGE.