IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7231 of 2010(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BABU JOHN,PALATHUMPATTU HOUSE, THITTAMEL KARA,CHENGANNUR.PO,ALLEPPEY DISTRICT, REP:BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER NINAN JOHN. BY ADV. SRI.SURIN GEORGE IPE RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REP:BY IT CHIEF SECRETARY,GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY,LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, SECRETARIAT,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. SENIOR TOWN PLANMNER (VIGILANCE), DEPARTMENT OF TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING, KOTTARATHIL BUILDINGS,PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033. 4. K.RAMAKRISHNAN,NARMADA,K.K.ROAD, KOTTAYAM. BY GP K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).7231/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned counsel for the 4th respondent and the learned Government Pleader. 2. Petitioner submits that he made Ext.P1 complaint to the 2nd respondent making certain allegations against the 4th respondent. It is stated that the 4th respondent also submitted a similar complaint. On receipt of these two complaints, the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P2 notice scheduling a hearing on 17.2.2010. According to the petitioner, both himself and the 4th respondent appeared and were heard by the 2nd respondent. 3. In this writ petition, the complaint of the petitioner is that the 2nd respondent has not so far taken any decision despite having heard the parties as mentioned above. On the other hand, learned counsel for the 4th respondent submits that the 2nd W.P.(C).7231/2010 2 respondent has no jurisdiction to take a decision on the issue. 4. I have considered the submissions made. Having regard to the pendency of the matter before the 2nd respondent, without expressing anything on the merits of the contentions and by the parties and leaving it entirely open to the 2nd respondent to decide the entire issues, it is directed that the 2nd respondent shall pass orders pursuant to the hearing that was held on 17.2.2010. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within three weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with the copy of the writ petition. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs