IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 8344 of 2008(R)
1. JOSEPH ROYSON, THAIKKOOTTATHIL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KADAMAKUDY GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
... Respondent
2. THE TAHASILDAR,
3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
4. JUSE ANTONY, THAIKKOOTTATHIL HOUSE,
For Petitioner :SRI.K.R.VINOD
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :12/03/2008
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J.
----------------------------------
W.P.(C) NO. 8344 of 2008
----------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of March , 2008
JUDGMENT
I do not propose to go into the merits of the various
grounds raised. According to the petitioner, Ext.P7 notice was
issued by the Panchayat to the fourth respondent, who is the
petitioner’s uncle. The fourth respondent had no right over the
property which is subject matter of Ext.P7. The said property,
according to the petitioner, is covered by Ext.P2 title document
as well as Ext.P3 Pattayam standing in the name of the
petitioner’s predecessor. The petitioner claims to be paying
revenue for the property and Ext.P4 revenue receipt is also relied
on. On coming to know that the Panchayat has initiated
proceedings for recovering the possession of the property by
issuing Ext.P7, the petitioner has submitted Ext.P8 representation
before the Secretary of the Panchayat. Along with Ext.P8, the
petitioner has produced as many as seven documents which
WPC No.8344/2008 2
support his claims over the property.
2. When this writ petition came up for hearing, the
Additional Advocate General has taken notice on behalf of
respondents 2 and 3. I have heard the submissions of the
learned Additional Advocate General also.
3. Having regard to the submissions addressed by the
counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Advocate
General, this Writ Petition will stand disposed of without deciding
the merits of the grounds raised in the following terms;
i). The Secretary of the Panchayat will take up Ext.P8,
examine the various documents produced along with Ext.P8, hear
the petitioner and take a correct decision on Ext.P8. If necessary
further inspection and measurement will also be conducted with
notice to the petitioner and also to the fourth respondent.
ii). The decision pursuant to the above direction shall be
taken by the Panchayat at the earliest and at any rate within six
weeks of receiving a copy of this judgment.
Iii). Considering the above directions, the Secretary of the
Panchayat is directed not to take any action in furtherance to
WPC No.8344/2008 3
Ext.P7 for abating the alleged encroachment till such time as the
directions in this judgment are complied with.
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE
JUDGE.
dpk