IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 29TH MARCH 2010 / 8TH CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 10767 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- V.ALEXANDER,AGED 72,S/O.VALAYIL EALIS KATHANAR,IYANATTU THEKKUMCHERRY VALAYIL, IYKKARANADU SOUTH VILLAGE,KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, KOLENCHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.T.K.VENUGOPALAN SRI.SHIBU JOSEPH RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. VADAVUCODE BLOCK PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,VADAVUCODE,ERNAKULAM. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,VADAVUCODE BLOCK PANCHAYATH,VADAVUCODE,ERNAKULAM. 3. POOTHRIKKA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,POOTHRIKKA,PUTHENCRUZ, ERNAKULAM. 4. P.M.JACOB,AGED,S/O.MATHULLA,PANNIKUZHIL HOUSE,IYAKKARANADU SOUTH VILLAGE,KOLENCHERRY.PO, ERNAKULAM. 5. P.M.JOHN,S/O.PAILY MATHULLA, DO- DO- THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/03/2010 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No.10767 of 2010 (U) -------------------------- Dated, this the 29th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T In Ext.P5 judgment rendered by this Court in WP(C) No.7389 of 2010 dated 08/03/2010, this Court directed consideration of the representation filed by the 5th respondent. According to the petitioner, the claim made by the 5th respondent is unsustainable, and therefore, his contention also should be considered at the time when the 3rd respondent considers the matter as directed in Ext.P5 judgment. 2. I feel the claim made is justified, and therefore, there will be a direction to the 3rd respondent herein to issue notice to the petitioner also, as and when action is taken on the basis of the directions in Ext.P5 judgment referred to above. The petitioner may produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition, before the 3rd respondent for compliance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE.