IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 6TH MARCH 2009 / 15TH PHALGUNA 1930 OP.No. 24811 of 2001(D) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ SMT. ANNAKUTTY ISSAC W/O. ISSAC PUTHANANGADY, PARAKKATT THALAMUDITHARA HOUSE, CHEMNATHUKARA KARA, VAIKOM VILLAGE. BY ADV. MR.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR) MR.GEORGEKUTTY P.I. RESPONDENT(S): ------------------ 1. STATE OF KEARLA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION(E) DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE VAIKOM MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, VAIKOM P.O. KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY. 4. THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNING OFFICER, COLELCTORATE P.O., KOTTAYAM. 5. SRI.JOMY L.K. S/O. LONAPPAN, KANIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, CANAL SIDE, SOUTH GATE, VAIKOM. ADL.R6: JESSY, W/O. JOSE @ ITTIERAH, KANIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, WEST GATE, VAIKOM. ADDL.R7: JERIN, S/O. JOSE @ ITTIERAH (MINOR), KANIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE,WEST GATE, VAIKOM, REP.BY HIS MOTHER AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, JESSY, W/O. JOSE @ ITTIERAH, KANIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, WEST GATE, VAIKOM. (ADDL.R5 TO R7 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.25.2.2009 IN IA2889/09) GOVERNMENT PLEADER MS. K.R. DEEPA MR.GEORGE KARITHANAM VARGHESE FOR R3 MR.JOSEPH A.VADAKKEL FOR R3 OP.No. 24811 of 2001 MR.C.I.ABRAHAM FOR R3 MR.JOSE KURIAKOSE (VILANGATTIL) FOR R3 MR.T.K.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI FOR R5 MR.GEORGE T. THACHETT FOR R5 THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 06/03/2009, ALONG WITH OP NO. 36095 OF 2000 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: OP.No. 24811 of 2001 ORDER ON C.M.P.NO.40611 OF 2001 IN O.P.NO.24811 OF 2001 CLOSED. 6.3.2009. SD/- S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = O.P.No.24811 of 2001-D = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 25th day of October, 2007. O R D E R 1.It appears that a submission was made on 24-9-2007 before my learned brother Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pius C. Kuriakose that this writ petition was heard by me along with another O.P. Apparently, the request was for listing the matter before me as if it was heard in part, by me. Recording such submission, this matter has been listed before me today. 2.All that appears to have been done by me, that too, as early as on 26-6-2007 is that I had issued an order directing the filing of counter affidavit and production of certain documents. This only means that I had attempted OP24811/2001 -: 2 :- to expedite the final disposal of this writ petition. 3.No member of the Bar appearing in this case ought to have made a submission that the matter was heard and the matter requires to be heard by me. To my mind, the procedure is that when a Judge treats a matter as part heard, that exercise is one that he does, not at the dictates or whims of the party or Advocate. Without a proper endorsement in that regard, by the Judge who has treated it as part heard, or the court officer of that court, it is not proper to state before another Hon'ble Judge that the matter is part heard before another Judge. I am unhappy as to what has happened in this case. The Hon'ble the Chief Justice may excuse me from hearing this case. AVOID. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/- OP24811/2001 -: 3 :- THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = O.P.No.24811 of 2001-D = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = O R D E R Dated: 25th October, 2007.