J U D G M E N T

Pius C.Kuriakose, J.

The landlord is the petitioner in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution. The prayers sought for in the petition are (i) to restrain the third respondent Accommodation Controller from proceeding with Ext.P1 which is a petition under Section 17 (2) filed by respondents

1 and 2 who are the tenants, and (ii) to quash Ext.P3.

2. We shall first deal with the second prayer. Ext.P3 is not an order. P3 is only an intimation given by the Accommodation Controller to the petitioner with reference to an application for copy of an order dated 6-8-2008 passed by the Accommodation Controller. What is stated by the Accommodation Controller in Ext.P3 is that no order as such has been passed on 6-8-2008 and that on that date the Village Officer has been authorised to inspect the building and submit a report. Even though it is not a certified copy of the order or proceedings dated 6-8-2008 which is granted to the petitioner, we are of the view that the petitioner cannot have any legitimate grievance about Ext.P3, as the petitioner has been supplied with the information sought for.

3. Now we come to the prayer to injunct the third respondent from pro