IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 28TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3147 of 2010(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SAIFUDEEN,ODAYAM MELEPEEDIKAYIL, EDAVA.P.O,VARKALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.M.HUSAIN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY,SECRETARIATE,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY,EDAVA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VARKALA,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR,VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANNTHAPURAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. V. VINOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.3147 OF 2010 (P) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The main grievance in this writ petition is that in spite of having made Exts.P6 and P8, no action has been taken by the first respondent. 2. According to the petitioner, a building constructed by him was demolished by the Panchayat and as a result of which huge loss was caused. This made the petitioner to file Exts.P6 and P8, wherein the main request is that vigilance enquiry should be initiated against the authorities of the Panchayat. 3. When the case came up for admission on 1.2.2010, the case was adjourned with a direction to the learned Government Pleader to obtain instruction about the status of Exts.P6 and P8. It is now reported that on receipt of Ext.P6, the Director of Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau directed the Circle Inspector, Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau, to conduct an enquiry and submit a report. It is submitted that pursuant there to a surprise check was conducted and that the Circle Inspector is in the process of preparing his report for submission to the Director, WPC.No. 3147/2010 :2 : V&ACB. It is stated that thereafter the Director will take appropriate action in this matter. Thus it is obvious that contrary to the allegation in the writ petition ,on receipt of Exts.P6 and P8, action has been initiated and therefore the premises on which the petitioner filed this writ petition is factually incorrect. Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the authorities to continue further action on Ext.P6 and take it to its logical conclusions without any delay. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/