IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR TUESDAY, THE 1ST DECEMBER 2009 / 10TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 32903 of 2009(G) ------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- A.YESUDAS, AGED 71 YEARS S/O.AMBROSE, JOY COTTAGE, CHANI, KANJIRAMKULAM P.O NEYYATTINKARA TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.R.MANOJ SMT.SINDHU MANOJ SMT.SUSAN MATHEW SRI.N.S.RAVINDRANATHAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POOVAR POLICE STATION, POOVAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. 2. LISTER SANTHAM, SANTHALAYAM, VIRALA, KANJIRAMKULAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.T.K.VIPINDAS ADV.R.T.PRADEEP FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/12/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 32903 of 2009 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF BYE-LAWS OF CHANI AGRICULTURAL PROJECT. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 3/6/2009. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ACQUAINTANCE REGISTERES SHOWING THE RECEIPT OF SALARY BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT AND SAM RAJ. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF RESIGNATION TENDERED BY SAM RAJ. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE MEMORANDUM OF WRIT PETITION IN W.P.(C). NO.28877 OF 2009 ON THE FILES OF THIS COURT. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE COUNTER AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE PETITIONER IN EXT.P1 WRIT PETITION. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN I.A.NO.13433 OF 2009 IN W.P.(C).NO.28877 OF 2009. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 5/11/2009. EXT.P8(A): TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT /TRUE COPY/ PA TO JUDGE KURIAN JOSEPH & C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JJ ------------------------------------------ W.P.(C). No.32903 of 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of December,2009 JUDGMENT Kurian Joseph.J The writ petition is filed with the following prayer: “Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the first respondent to afford adequate protection to the petitioner to conduct pumping operations as permitted in Ext.P7 order of this Honourable Court”. 2. We find that in W.P.C.No.28877/2009 this court had passed Ext.P7 order, wherein it is ordered that “in order to enable the pumping operations to continue,it is directed that it will be open to the third respondent to make arrangements for continuing pumping operations”. Therefore the second respondent cannot prevent the petitioner conducting pumping operations or making arrangements for the pumping operations. The learned counsel appearing for the second respondent undertakes that he will not cause any obstruction to the petitioner in conducting the pumping operation or in making arrangements for the pumping operations. The above submission is recorded. In the unlikely event of any obstruction, it will be open to the petitioner to approach the first W.P.(C). No.32903 of 2009 2 respondent, in which case, the first respondent will render necessary protection. 3. The writ petition is disposed of as above . We make it clear that directions in this judgment are subject to the outcome of W.P.C.No.28877/2009 referred above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE C.T.RAVIKUMAR,JUDGE ssn