IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 14TH JUNE 2011 / 24TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 18405 of 2003(N) ------------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. PAILY JOSEPH, AGED 69 YEARS, S/O. PAILY, THEKKEKARA HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM. 2. SHAJU THOMAS, AGED 27 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, KAROTTU VEETTIL HOUSE, MALAYINKEEZHU, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.PEEYUS A.KOTTAM RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL ADMINISTRATION, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY, SUB DIVISION, KOTHAMANGALAM. 3. THE SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, COLLECTORATE, KAKKANAD, DISTRICT ERNAKULAM. R1 TO R3 BY SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. T.T. MUHAMOOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss ORDER ON I.A.NO.4305/2003 IN WPC.NO.18405/2003 N DISMISSED 14/06/2011 SD/- T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 (A)&(B): COPY OFTHE DOCUMENT NOS. 2101/1/02 AND 3180/02 OF THE KOTHAMANGALAM S.R.O. DTD. 28/05/2002 AND 5/08/2002 RESPECTIVELY. P2(A)&(B): COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONERS FOR THE YEAR 2002-03 DTD. 5/7/2002 AND 23/10/2002. P3: COPY OF THE SAID NOTICE DTD. 26/06/2002 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. P4: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER DTD. 17/01/2003 BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P5: COPY OF THE ORDER IN CMP 3180/2003 IN O.P.1780/2003 DTD. 26/05/2003 PASSED BY THIS HONOURABLE COURT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: N I L /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.18405 Of 2003 ----------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 14th DAY OF JUNE, 2011 J U D G M E N T Apprehending eviction proceedings against Exhibit P3 notice, this Writ Petition has been filed. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that already the building has been numbered and as on today there is no action in the matter against the petitioner. It is made clear that if any action is proposed to be taken against the petitioner, the same will be done only after serving proper notice to him in accordance with law. 3. In the light of the subsequent developments and in view of the submission noted above, Exhibit P3 has lost its relevancy and if any further action is contemplated, fresh action can be initiated. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. Sd/-(T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) dsn