IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 27TH JANUARY 2009 / 7TH MAGHA 1930 WP(C).No. 1082 of 2009(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: -------------- MOHAMMED AGED 60 YEARS, S/O.HYDRU, RESIDING AT CHOLACKAL PULIKKAL PARAMBU, THANNALUR, AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.C.V.MANUVILSAN SMT.VIDYA MANUVILSAN RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, TIRUR. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER THANALLUR, TIRUR 5. SIVASANKARAN, S/O.KARAPPAN, CHAKKALAM KUNNATHU, OZHUR AMSOM, AYYAYA DESOM, OZHUR P.O. TIRUR. 6. MOHAMMED, NANDANIL, THANNALUR AMSOM DESOM, TIRUR TALUKI, MALAPPURAM 7. KARAPPAN, S/O. UNNEERI,CHAKKALAM KUNNATHU, OZHUR AMSOM, AYYAYA DESOM, OZHUR P.O. TIRUR. R1 TO R4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SMT.SUDHADEVI THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/01/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ----------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 1082 of 2009 -------------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of January, 2009 JUDGMENT Exhibit P1 is the proceedings of the 3rd respondent. It was passed on 17/10/2006, after notice to him and one Aliyamutty, on the allegation that the pathway to the complainant's residential premises. Petitioner now contends that Aliyamutty mentioned in Exhibit P1 is expired and that on the strength of Exhibit P1, attempt is made to destroy the fence which he has put up in respect of his property. In my view, if the petitioner has a complaint that under the cover of Exhibit P1, the petitioner is harrased or that any any damage is attempted to be committed in respect of his property, it is only appropriate for the petitioner to move the second respondent himself and so that, the second respondent could issue necessary clarification to his subordinate to avoid any harassment to the petitioner. I therefore, direct the petitioner to approach the second respondent, in which case, the second respondent shall deal with the complaint and take necessary steps for redressal of the petitioner's grievance. W.P.(C) No. 1082 /2009 2 Petitioner shall make a representation to the second respondent along with a copy of this judgment, in which case, appropriate action as directed shall be taken. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm