IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 10TH JUNE 2011 / 20TH JYAISHTA 1933 WP(C).No. 15717 of 2011(L) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- MADHU.S., S/O.SIVASANKARA PILLAI, AGED 35, GEETHA BHAVAN, PULLUVAZHY KARA, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.RENJITH RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE OFFICE, PERUMBAVOOR. 4. AJITH KARTHA, AGED 34, S/O.MUKDHAN KARATHA, KARIMATTAM HOUSE, PULLUVAZHY KARA, RAYAMANGALAM VILLAGE, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.NARAYANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 15717 of 2011(L) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:- EXHIBIT P1 : COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P2 : COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 4TH RESPONDENT DTD.28.5.2011. EXHIBIT P3 : COMPLAINT GIVEN TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT . RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL TRUE COPY P.A. TO JUDGE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J -------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.15717 OF 2011 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of June 2011 JUDGMENT The grievance of the petitioner is that illegal sand mining is being pursued by the 4th respondent from the nearby paddy field, adversely affecting the rights and interests of the persons like the petitioner, which hence has been sought to be redressed by filing Ext.P3 compliant before the 2nd respondent. It is stated that Ext.P3 is still to be acted upon, which hence is under challenge before this Court. 2. Heard the learned Govt. Pleader as well. 3. Considering the limited nature of the relief now pressed before this Court for a direction to have Ext.P3 considered and finalised within a reasonable time, this Court does not find it necessary to issue notice to the 4th respondent for the time being. 4. In the above circumstances, the Writ Petition is disposed of, directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 and pass final orders in accordance with law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and also to the 4th respondent, which shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 'six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. W.P.(C) No.15717/2011 2 5. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition before the 2nd respondent for taking further steps. vdv P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE