IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 14866 of 2009(C)
1. E.NAZEERUDEEN, SABIL HOUSE,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIMANOOR.
... Respondent
2. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KILIMANOOR.
3. KILIMANOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS
4. AJITHAN, CHAMAVILA VEEDU, PONGANAD.
5. SHAJI, WOODLAND,PONGANAD.
6. MANOJ, THETTIKKUZHIVILA VEEDU, PONGANAD.
7. JAYAKUMAR, ALAPPATT VEEDU, PONGANAD.
For Petitioner :SRI.PIRAPPANCODE V.S.SUDHIR
For Respondent :SRI. K.SIJU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.R.RAMAN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.BHAVADASAN
Dated :06/07/2009
O R D E R
P.R. RAMAN & P. BHAVADASAN, JJ.
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
W.P.(C) NO. 14866 OF 2009
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
DATED THIS, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY, 2009.
J U D G M E N T
Raman, J.
Third respondent Panchayath, on being served notice, entered
appearance through counsel. It is submitted that though the Panchayat had
granted permission for construction of the compound wall earlier, it has
been revoked subsequently since the same was not constructed in
accordance with the plan. subsequently, a revised plan was submitted.
2. In the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner, Ext.P11 is produced
which is a request to the Panchayat for inspecting the property and satisfy
themselves that the petitioner’s construction is strictly within his boundaries
only. Ext.P11 will be considered by the Panchayath and a decision will be
taken after hearing all parties concerned. At this stage, there is no room for
giving any protection. It is assured that the panchayath will take a decision
and communicate the same to the petitioner as early as possible at any rate,
within a period of one month.
The writ petition is disposed of as above.
P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE.
P. BHAVADASAN, JUDGE.
KNC/-