IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1931 WA.No. 277 of 2010() -------------------- (AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP.(C) NO.33001 OF 2009) APPELLANT(S): -------------- INFANT THOMAS, MATTEL HOUSE, MACHIPLAVU, IDUKKI. BY ADV. SRI.P.P.JACOB RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. ADIMALI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, ADIMALI, IDUKKI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, ADIMALI BLOCK, ADIMALI, IDUKKI. 3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (DA) DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN, Ag.C.J. & C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ------------------------------- W.A.No.277 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T Raman, Ag.C.J. Appellant who is the writ petitioner has approached this Court for a direction to the Panchayat to give enhancement in the rate provided for the work undertaken by them. The learned Single Judge, after considering the matter found that the claim is not sustainable and the decision of the Panchayat cannot be interfered with. After arguing for some time, the learned counsel for the appellant submits that he may be permitted to withdraw the appeal as also the writ petition, without prejudice to his rights, if any, under law, to work out his remedies, in accordance with law. 2. We heard the learned counsel for the appellant as also learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat. This is a case where the appellant entered into a contract with the Panchayat. Thereafter, if there is any dispute W.A.No.277 of 2010 2 between the parties, they can work out their remedies under the terms of the contract. This is not a matter to be decided under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. In such circumstances, we find no merit in this appeal. Since the appellant wants to withdraw the appeal as also the writ petition, both the writ appeal and the writ petition are dismissed as withdrawn. However, the dismissal of the writ appeal and the writ petition will not stand in the way of the appellant seeking other remedies open to him, if he is otherwise entitled to. P.R.RAMAN, Ag. CHIEF JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE nj.