IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 25TH JANUARY 2010 / 5TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2395 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.P.PHILIP, CHITTUNDAYIL THEKKETHIL HOUSE, KANNANKODE, ADOOR, REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, MATHEWS PHILIP, CHITTUNDIYIL THEKKETHIL HOUSE, KANNANKODE, ADOOR. BY ADV. SRI.SEBASTIAN PHILIP SRI.R.ANIL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. ADOOR MUNICIPALITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, ADOOR. 3. THE SECRETARY, ADOOR MUNICIPALITY, MUNICIPAL OFFICE, ADOOR. 4. A.M.SAJI, PARTNER, PRATHEESH FUELS, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION PETROL PUMP, ADOOR. 5. SHIRLY SAJI, W/O.A.M.SAJI, PARTNER, PRATHEESH FUELS, INDIAN OIL CORPORATION PETROL PUMP, ADOOR. 6. THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY GP K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No. 2395 of 2010 -------------------------- Dated, this the 25th day of January, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. The complaint of the petitioner is against respondents 4 and 5, husband and wife, who are running a petrol pump. According to the petitioner, the aforesaid respondents installed a pipe, for the overflow of waste water from the bathroom constructed by them in the premises of petroleum outlet for the use of their staff and customers. 2. Various proceedings were pending between the parties, before the Municipality, the Appellate Body and the Tribunal, the last of which is Ext.P10, an order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in R.P.No.49/2009, in which the Secretary was directed to inspect the place, prepare mahazar and take fresh action, if necessary. It is stated that without conducting any inspection or preparing mahazar as directed in Ext.P10, the Secretary issued Ext.P11 notice, which, according to the petitioner, was intended only to help respondents 4 and 5. 3. According to them, even after the issuance of Ext.P11, W.P.(C).2395/10 2 further action was not initiated by respondents 4 and 5. Thereafter Exts.P12 and P14 representations were made by the petitioner. While so, they came to know that Ext.P15 appeal was filed against Ext.P11, which is pending consideration by the 2nd respondent. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court complaining that inordinate delay is caused in finalizing the proceedings, as a result of which the pumping of waste water into their premises is continuing even now. 4. Having heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, it is noticed that as at present Ext.P11 is a notice issued by the 2nd respondent in purported compliance with Ext.P10 order passed by the Tribunal and that an appeal has been filed against Ext.P11 which is pending consideration of the Council. Therefore, what is required to be done at this stage is to direct that expeditious orders be passed on Ext.P15. 5. Therefore, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions W.P.(C).2395/10 3 6. The 2nd respondent shall dispose of Ext.P15 appeal filed by respondents 4 and 5 against Ext.P11 with notice to the petitioner and respondents 4 and 5, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within four weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. 7. Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment along with the copy of the writ petition before the 2nd respondent for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs