IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 11TH JANUARY 2010 / 21TH POUSHA 1931 WP(C).No. 34806 of 2009(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. A. SURESH BABU, PRESIDENT, AZHUTHA BLOCK PANCHAYATH, PEERUMEDU, IDUKKI DIST. 2. LEELAMMA GOPINATH, PRESIDENT, KATTAPPANA BLOCK PANCHAYATH, IDUKKI DIST. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHOSH KUMAR (PANAMPALLI NAGAR) SRI.LUIZ GODWIN D'COUTH SRI.K.P.CHANDRASEKHAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------ 1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LSGD, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, KERALA PWD GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF RURAL DEVELOPMENT, LMS COMPOUND, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, KERALA PWD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, LSGD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.34806 OF 2009 (U) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners' grievance is that consequent on the abolition of Engineering Wing in the Local Self Government Department, plan and non-plan activities which were going on were stopped, for want of technical personnel to supervise and implement the projects. According to the petitioners, in view of the above situation, an order requiring the respondents to keep in abeyance the directions issued to the Block Panchayat Secretaries, abolishing the Engineering Wing, is necessary. 2. This is essentially a matter of policy and it is for the Government to decide whether an Engineering Wing in the Local Self Government Department is necessary or not. Needless to say that, in case Engineering Wing is abolished, it is up to the Government to take such action as is necessary to remedy the situation. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing that appropriate action in this matter will be taken by the first respondent to redress the grievance raised in this writ petition, on the petitioners moving appropriate representation before him. (ANTONY DOMINIC) vi/ JUDGE