IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 16TH MARCH 2010 / 25TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 8569 of 2010(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- IBRAHIM ASHIR T.H., S/O.LATE P.K.HAMEED, P.K.HOUSE, TAGORE COLLEGE ROAD, VIDYA NAGAR P.O., KASARGODU. BY ADV. SRI.P.K.MUHAMMED RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KASARAGODU MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, KASARAGODU. 2. THE TOWN PLANNER, TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, KASARAGODU. 3. SMT.UMAIMA, W/O.LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN, K.M.C.13/224 A, THERUVATH HOUSE, THALANGARA VILLAGE, THALANGARA POST, KASARAGODU. 4. MUHAMMED RAMEESH, S/O.LATE ABDUL RAHIMAN K.M.C.13/224A, THERUVATH HOUSE, THALANGARA VILLAGE THALANGARA POST, KASARAGODU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- W.P.(C).8569/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 16th day of March, 2010 JUDGMENT Petitioner's complaint is that respondents 3 and 4 are allegedly constructing a commercial building which according to the petitioner, is in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Municipality Building Rules. It is seen that the petitioner has raised this allegation by filing Ext.P2 before the 1st respondent and the complaint is that the 1st respondent has not taken any action on Ext.P2. 2. Having regard to the above, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to take action on Ext.P2 with notice to respondents 3 and 4. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that this Court has not expressed anything on the merits of the contentions of the petitioner. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs