IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH JANUARY 2008 / 26TH POUSHA 1929 WA.No. 1373 of 2007() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.10389/2005 Dated 30/11/2005 .................... APPELLANT: PETITIONER --------------------- K.AMBIKA, CASUAL PART TIME SWEEPER, RE-SURVEY OFFICE, CIVIL STATION, VYTHIRI, WAYANAD. (W/O CHANDRAN, CHAKKALIPPURATH HOUSE, P.O.PULIYARAMALA, KALPATTA, WAYANAD DIST.). BY ADV. SRI.JESWIN P.VARGHESE RESPONDENTS: RESPONDENTS ------------------------ 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, WAYANAD. 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF SURVEYS AND LAND RECORDS, B-BLOCK, 2ND FLOOR, COLLECTORATE, KALPATTA, WAYANADU. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE DIRECTOR OF SURVEYS, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SHRI. BENNY GERVASIS THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K.Balakrishnan Nair & P.N.Ravindran, JJ. ======================== W.A.No.1373 of 2007 ======================== Dated this the 16th day of January, 2008. JUDGMENT Balakrishnan Nair,J. The judgment under appeal is one in favour of the appellant. Her complaint appears to be that the learned single Judge failed to take into account the fact that the benefits payable pursuant to Ext.P1 judgment of this Court have not been released to her. We feel that it is not a matter which should have been considered by the learned single Judge as it is already covered by Ext.P1 judgment. If the direction in Ext.P1 is not obeyed, the remedy of the petitioner is not to file a fresh petition. She has to work out her remedy against the respondents who violated the judgment. 2. In view of the said position, we are of the opinion that it is unnecessary to entertain this writ appeal. Accordingly, the writ appeal is dismissed. K.Balakrishnan Nair, Judge. P.N.Ravindran, Judge. ess 17/1