Shanti Joseph T vs Mala Grama Panchayat
2022 Latest Caselaw 9360 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF AUGUST 2022 / 19TH SRAVANA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 10117 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          SHANTI JOSEPH T.,
          AGED 46 YEARS,
          MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S. MALA CATHOLIC SOCIAL FORUM
          CHITTIES PVT LTD., THATTAKATHIL BUILDINGS (OPP.KSRTC
          BUS STATION MALA, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 732

          BY ADVS.
          G.HARIHARAN
          PRAVEEN.H.
          K.S.SMITHA
          V.R.SANJEEV KUMAR
          ANJALY T.A


RESPONDENTS:

    1     MALA GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
          MALA, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 732,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

    2     DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
          CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-681 002

          BY ADV.
          SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
          SRI.M.H.HANIL KUMAR, SC
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.08.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 10117 OF 2022        -2-



                             JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following

prayers:

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the Secretary of the 1st respondent panchayat to take follow up action on Exhibit.P1 judgment to built a new bund across the canal without any further delay.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the 2nd respondent to take follow up action on Exhibit.P1 judgment to built a new bund across the canal without any further delay

And

(iii) To pass such orders or reliefs as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice"

2. The main grievance is that after Ext.P1

judgment no further action is taken by the respondents.

If the petitioner is aggrieved by the inaction by the

authorities after Ext.P1 judgment, the petitioner has the

remedy to file a contempt case. So the petitioner is free

to file a contempt case. Therefore, this writ petition is

closed.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE vv

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10117/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 25.11.2021 IN WPC 6288 OF 2021

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 20.12.2021 ADDRESSING TO THE RESPONDENT

Exhibit P2A TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST FILED BY THE PETITIONER ON 20.12.2021 ADDRESSING TO THE RESPONDENT

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RTI FILED ON 10.01.2022

Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY FILED ON EXHIBIT P3 RTI APPLICATION DATED 03.02.2022

Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PRESENT STATUS OF THE DEFUNCT BUND