IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.H.L.DATTU & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.BASHEER MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 33766 of 2008(S) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: -------------------- 1. P.A.ALIYAR, S/O.LATE ABOOBACKER, AGED 61 YEARS, PUTHUVAMULAYIL HOUSE, KUDILIL, THRIKKAKARA P.O., COCHIN - 682 021. 2. P.S.SHAJI, S/O.SULAIMAN, AGED 34 YEARS, PARAYANTHAZHATHU HOUSE, VAZHAKKALA, THRIKKAKARA P.O., COCHIN - 682 021. BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI P.CHALY SRI.S.GOPAKUMAR RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, THRIKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH. 4. K.S.SUBHASH, KIZHAKKEPARAMBIL HOUSE, PARKLANE, KOTTAYAM. WPC No. 33766 OF 2008 5. M/S.ABAD BUILDERS, C/O.HOTEL ABAD M.G.ROAD, KOCHI - 682 011. R1 & R2 BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN R3 BY ADV. SRI.S.SHANAVAS, SC. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: H.L.DATTU, C.J. & A.K.BASHEER, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C).No. 33766 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of November 2008 JUDGMENT A.K.BASHEER, J. Petitioners who are stated to be permanent residents of Thrikkakara in Ernakulam District have preferred this Writ Petition alleging illegal construction of a building by respondents 4 and 5 at Thrikkakara. According to the petitioners, respondents 4 and 5 are still continuing the illegal construction, in spite of Ext.P5 communication issued by the Thrikkakara Grama Panchayat informing those respondents that they could continue the constructions only after they produce documents to show that they have not trespassed into the public road included under the Periyar Valley Scheme. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners would contend that the Secretary of the Panchayat is statutorily bound to ensure that any such illegal activity is prevented. It is further contended that in spite of issuance of Ext.P5, no follow up action was taken by the Secretary to stop the illegal construction. In our view, the contentions raised by the petitioners cannot be entertained at this stage. If for any reason the petitioners are of the view WP(C)No.33766 of 2008 -:2:- that 3rd respondent is failing in his duty, the said fact ought to be brought to the notice of the superior authorities. We, therefore, refuse to entertain this Writ Petition at this stage. Accordingly it is dismissed. (H.L.DATTU) CHIEF JUSTICE (A.K.BASHEER) JUDGE ttb