IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 14TH JULY 2010 / 23RD ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22005 of 2010(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- DILEEP KUMAR, RESIDING AT KULANGARA VADAKKATHIL KOTTAKKAKAM, CHAVARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JOHNSON GOMEZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691013. 2. THE CHAVARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, CHAVARA.P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-691058. 3. CHANDRASEKHARAN PILLAI, PRASANTHI, EDATHARA, KOTTAMKULANGARA, CHAVARA,KOLLAM DISTRICT-691058. 4. THULASEEDHARAN PILLAI, MEMBER, WARD NO.14, CHAVARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691058. 5. THE OMBUDSMAN, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R1 BY G.P. SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 22005 of 2010-A - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of July, 2010. JUDGMENT This writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P5 order passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate, Kollam under Section 133(1)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The petitioner has already shown cause by submitting Ext.P6 before the Sub Divisional Magistrate. 2. If the petitioner is aggrieved by Ext.P5 order, he will have to resort to the remedies provided under the Code of Criminal Procedure. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the first respondent may be directed to consider Ext.P6. It is clear from Ext.P5 itself that the petitioner was asked to show cause why the order should not be made absolute. It is also reported that the matter is posted before the Sub Divisional Magistrate, today. 3. Therefore, it is up to the first respondent to take a decision in the matter in accordance with law. If the petitioner is still having any grievance with regard to the order Ext.P5, he will have to resort to appropriate wpc 22005/2010 2 remedies. With the above observations, the writ petition is disposed of. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/