IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH APRIL 2008 / 20TH CHAITHRA 1930 WP(C).No. 8785 of 2008(U) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- ANAS C.M., S/O.MOHAMED CHERUVALLYKUDY HOUSE, EDAVOORKARA KOOVAPPADY VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK ERNAKULAM (DIST) BY ADV. SRI.ANIL K.MOHAMMED RESPONDENTS: ----------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 2. OKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, OKKAL, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ADDL.RESPONDENTS 3. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT SAND WORKERS UNION,(AITUC) OKKAL PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE, OKKAL P.O, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 4. OKKAL MEKHALA MANAL THOZHILALI UNION, (INTUC), OKKAL PO, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. ERNAKULAM JILLA MANAL THOZHILALI UNION (CITU), OKKAL PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE, OKKAL PO, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 6. ERNAKULAM JILLA NIRMANA THOZHILALI SANGH (BMS), PERUMBAVOOR MEKHALA COMMITTEE, PERUMBAVOOR P.O, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. (RESPONDENTS 3 TO 6 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER IN IA NO.3911/08 DT.24/03/2008) BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR ADDL.R3 TO R6 SRI.MANU GOVIND SRI.NIREESH MATHEW SC FOR R2 GOVT.PLEADER SRI.I.V.PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/04/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NO. 8785 OF 2008 U ==================== Dated this the 9th day of April, 2008 J U D G M E N T The prayer in this writ petition is for directing the implementation of Ext.P5, which reflects the decision taken by the 1st respondent District Collector to revise Ext.P2. According to the petitioner, despite having issued Ext.P5, the respondent Panchayat is not implementing the same, but is still following Ext.P2. 2. From the submissions made before this court, it was found that the Panchayat was also under the impression that Ext.P2 was revived by the District Collector. However, instructions have been taken by the learned Government Pleader from the 1st respondent and it is submitted that though there is a proposal to reexamine the matter, as at present, Ext.P5 still holds the field and that the same shall be implemented. 3. In view of this, directing that Ext.P5 will be implemented until it is revised, this writ petition is disposed of. Needless to say that the authorities shall expedite the proposal for revising the decision in Ext.P5. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp