IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 26TH MARCH 2010 / 5TH CHAITHRA 1932 RP.No. 306 of 2010(E) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.5650/2010 Dated 22/02/2010 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER(S): IST RESPONDENT ------------------------------------ THE SECRETARY, MANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.M.MOHAMMED IQUABAL RESPONDENT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------- 1. V.P.SAFIYA, W/O.MOHAMMED, VALAPPIL PAKKIKKANAKATH HOUSE, MANGALAM AMSOM, KOOTAYI DESOM, TIRUR TALU, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. V.P.MAJEED, S/O.V.P.H.KOYA, VETTOM AMSOM, RANDATHANI DESOM, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY JAMSHEED HAFIZ THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ------------------- R.P.306/2010 in W.P.(C).5650/2010 -------------------- Dated this the 26th day of March, 2010 ORDER The writ petition was disposed of directing that the review petitioner shall take steps for the enforcement of the stop memos that were issued to the 2nd respondent, if the stop memos are still in force. 2. In this Review Petition it is contended that on account of subsequent developments, stop memos are not in force and that despite having knowledge of this fact, the writ petition was filed and an order was obtained for implementation of the stop memos. 3. As already stated, if according to the Panchayat, stop memos are not in force, the judgment does not require it to implement the same. If on account of the subsequent developments, building has been numbered, and consequently stop memos are seized to be in force, Panchayat is under no R.P.306/10 2 obligation to implement the stop memos. With this clarification, Review Petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs