IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 31613 of 2008(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- KANNADASAN, S/O.RAMASWAMY GOUNDER, MANAKADAVU, CHITTUR TALUK, PALGHAT. BY ADV. SRI.P.SANTHALINGAM (SR.) SRI.S.SHARAN RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, CHITTUR TALUK, PALGHAT. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANAKADAVU, CHITTUR TALUK, PALGHAT. BY SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.D.ANILKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.31613 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P1 notice issued by the Village Officer, inter alia, requiring him to stop all activities for the purpose of digging a pond in his property. He submits that Ext.P1 is without jurisdiction. 2. The appropriate authority to look into the grievance of the petitioner is the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad. The petitioner has filed Ext.P3 representation before him and a copy of the same has been produced along with I.A.No.14207/08. In my view, it is only appropriate that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad looks into Ext.P3 and takes a decision. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad to look into Ext.P3 and take an appropriate decision, treating the same as an appeal against Ext.P1, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge