IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 2ND AUGUST 2011 / 11TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 20585 of 2011(W) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- CHERIAN A.PAUL, S/O.PAUL CHERIAN, MANGALATHU HOUSE, MAMMY'S COLONY, KAWDIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 907. BY ADVS. SRI.ANTONY C. ETTUKETTIL, SRI. MAHESH V. RAMAKRISHNAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN 695 001. 3. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001. 4. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695 001. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/08/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.20585/2011-W: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS & ANNEXURE: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE AGREEMENT EXECUTED BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND THE MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT. * EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. NIL. ISSUED BY THE R.3. (* ANNEXURE – A1 SUBSTITUTED IN THE PLACE OF EXHIBIT P.2 VIDE ORDER DATED 02/08/2011 IN I.A. NO.12408/2011). EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD 23/04/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.3. *ANNEXURE A1: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.D3/562/2008 DATED 16/10/2009 ISSUED BY THE R.3. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 20585 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of August , 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that 1 Acre and 6 Cents of property situated in R.Sy.No.32 and 15 of Thycaud Village, Thiruvananthapuram is owned by him. It is stated that on the basis of Ext.P1 agreement, connecting the said property he has constructed a bridge. It is his case that though the construction is fully in terms of the conditions of Ext.P1, he has been issued Ext.P2 order dated 16.10.2009, by which the 3rd respondent required the petitioner to demolish the bridge. 2. On receipt of Ext.P2 order, he has filed Ext.P3 application to the 2nd respondent requesting to inspect the bridge in question and verify the correctness of the allegations made in Ext.P2. It is stated that such a request was made for the reason that if there is any inadvertent deviation from Ext.P1, the petitioner is willing to rectify W.P.(C) No. 20585 OF 2011 :2 : such deviation. 3. In this writ petition what is sought for by the petitioner is a direction to the 2nd respondent to inspect the bridge as stated in Ext.P3 and to keep in abeyance all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2. 4. I have heard the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents. As at present, Ext.P3 request made by the petitioner is pending before the 2nd respondent. At this stage what is required is that the 2nd respondent shall consider the said application and pass orders on the same. This the 2nd respondent shall do as expeditiously as possible. In the meanwhile all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P2, shall be kept in abeyance. 5. Petitioner to produce a copy of this judgment before the 2nd and 3rd respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge