IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 9TH AUGUST 2011 / 18TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 21651 of 2011(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- POOZHI-KETTIDA NIRMANA THOZHILALI SAHAKARANA SANGAM, KIZHOOR,REG.NO.293/11, KIZHOOR WEST,P.O.CHANDRAGIRI,PIN-671317,KASARGOD DISTRICT, A SOCIETY REGD.UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE SRA ACT 1860,REP.BY ITS SECRETARY C.A.IQBAL, AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.AHAMMED. BY ADV. MR. T .MADHU RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE PORT CONSERVATOR, KASARAGOD, PORT OFFICE, KASARAGOD, PIN-671 121. 2. THE CHALIYANCODE POOOZHI WORKERS UNION, REG.NO.138/2008, KALANAD P.O., CHEMMANAD PANCHAYATH, KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN-671 317. 3. PALLAM DREDGING WORKERS UNION, REG.NO.138/2008, PALLAM P.O., KASARAGOD DISTRICT, PIN-671 318. 4. UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF PORTS, NEW DELHI, PIN-110 001. R1 AND R4 BY MR. S. JAMAL, CENTRAL GOVERNMENT COUNSEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO. 21651 OF 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS : EXT. P1 : A TRUE COPY OF THE BYE LAWS OF THE PETITIONER SOCIETY EXT. P2 : A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 14.07.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P (C) No . 21651 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 9th August , 2011 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner is that, the first respondent is awarding the work of removal of sand from Chandragiri Estuary without conducting any public auction in favour of the second and third respondents, which is sought to be intercepted. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, the petitioner has preferred Ext. P2 representation before first respondent, projecting the grievance and that the petitioner will be satisfied, if a direction is given to the said respondent to have it considered in accordance with law, within a reasonable time. 3. Heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and the learned Central Government Counsel appearing for the fourth respondent. 4. Considering the limited nature of relief sought for, this Court does not find it necessary to go into the merits of the case and notice to the 2nd and 3rd respondents is dispensed with for the time being. W.P. (C) No. 21651 of 2011 : 2 : In the said circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the first respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P2 in accordance with law, after hearing all concerned, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within four weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with copy of the writ petition before the first respondent for further steps. Sd/ P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd