IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID FRIDAY, THE 26TH AUGUST 2011 / 4TH BHADRA 1933 WP(C).No. 6259 of 2011(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- THANKAMANI.V., VIJAYAN NAIR, KIZHAKODITHAZHAM, PULLALLOOR, PARANNUR.P.O., NARIKUNI. KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. MADAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY MADAVOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MADAVOOR.P.O., NARIKUNI, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKKODE. 3. THAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KOZHIKODE. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, MADAVOOR VILLAGE OFFICE, MADAVOOR.P.O., NARIKUNI, KOZHIKKODE. 5. THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER, KOZHIKKODE. 6. SATHI DEVI, W/O. BALAN NAIR, KEEZEKODI VEEDU, PARANNOOR.P.O., NARIKUNI. ADV. MRI.R.SUDHISH FOR R1 MS.M.MANJU FOR R1 MR.K.R.RANJITH FOR R1 MS.NEETHU PREM FOR R1 MR.N.M.MADHU FOR R6 MS.C.S.RAJANI FOR R6 GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.G.GOPAKUMAR FOR R2-5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 26/08/2011, ALONG WITH WPC NO.9886 OF 2011 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 6259 of 2011(F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR. EXT.P2: FORWARDING LETTER OF R2 TO R1. EXT.P3: FORWARDING LETTER OF R2 TO R4. EXT.P4: COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE R5. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R6(a): BUILDING PERMIT. EXT.R6(b): APPROVED PLAN. EXT.R6(c): STOP MEMO ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER AS DIRECTED BY THE R.D.O. EXT.R6(d): SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY R1. EXT.R6(e): SETTLEMENT DEED. EXT.R6(f): ORIGINAL PARTITION DEED NO.442/1993. EXT.R6(g): CERTIFIED COPY OF THE PARTITION DEED NO.442/1993. EXT.R6(h): CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE. ...... // TRUE COPY // P.A TO JUDGE. HARUN-UL-RASHID, J. ------------------------ W.P.(C).Nos.6259 & 9886 Of 2011 ---------------------- Dated this the 26th day of August, 2011. J U D G M E N T It is submitted at the Bar that the issue is settled between the petitioner and 6th respondent in W.P.(C).No.6259/2011, who is the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.9886/2011. 2. In the light of the settlement arrived at between the parties, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and 6th respondent submits that Exts.P7, P10 and P12 in W.P.(C). No.9886/2011 may be quashed. Both sides filed separate affidavit. In the affidavit filed by the petitioner in W.P.(C).No.9886/2011 it is stated that she will not construct septic tank as shown in Ext.P2 approved plan provided the fourth respondent withdraws all her complaints filed before various authorities against the construction of the building as per Ext.P2 plan. The petitioner in W.P.(C). No.6259/2011 also undertook that she is willing to withdraw all the complaints filed before various authorities against the construction. The undertaking given by the parties are recorded. Writ petitions are disposed of in terms of settlement. HARUN-UL-RASHID, Judge. bkn/-