Vimala Sundaranm vs The Elamkunnappuzha Grama … on 30 November, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 35713 of 2010(L)


1. VIMALA SUNDARANM W/O. SUNDARAM,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. RAJAPPAN, S/O. APPU, VELLAMPURA KUZHI,

                        Vs



1. THE ELAMKUNNAPPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYAT
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE SECRETARY, ELAMKUNNAPPUZHA GRAMA

3. MRS. SHEELA BABU,,W/O. BABU.P.K.,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.GEORGE SEBASTIAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN

 Dated :30/11/2010

 O R D E R
                        P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
                        ---------------------------
                    W.P.(C) No. 35713 OF 2010
                         --------------------------
             Dated this the 30th day of November, 2010

                          J U D G M E N T

The petitioners are residents of Elamkunnappuzha Grama

Panchayat. By Exts.P1 and P2 notices dated 9.11.2010, the

Secretary of Elamkunnappuzha Grama Panchayat called upon the

petitioners to show cause why they should not be evicted from the

rod poramboke in their possession. The petitioners thereupon

submitted Exts.P3 and P4 objections. This writ petition is filed

seeking a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to strictly comply with

rule 5 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Removal of Encroachment and

Imposition and Recovery of Penalty for Unauthorised Occupation)

Rules, 1996 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the rules’ for short) before

taking action pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 notices. The petitioners

have also prayed for a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to consider

the objections raised by them in Exts.P3 and P4 and to hear them

before proceeding further in Exts.P1 and P2 notices.

2. When the writ petition came up for hearing today, Sri.

S.Shanavas Khan, the learned standing counsel appearing for

respondents 1 and 2 submitted that Exts.P1 and P2 notices were

WPC No.35713/2010 2

issued pursuant to Ext.P6 judgment of this Court, that the objections

raised by the petitioners in Exts.P3 and P4 were considered and that

as the objections were not found to be tenable, the committee of the

Panchayat has decided to proceed under rule 5(2) of the rules. The

learned standing counsel submitted that further proceedings

pursuant to Exts.P1 and P2 notices will be taken only in accordance

with the aforesaid rules. In the light of the said submission, the

apprehension entertained by the petitioners, according to me, is not

well founded.

I accordingly dispose of this writ petition recording the

undertaking given by respondents 1 and 2 that further proceedings

pursuant to Ext.P1 and P2 notices will be taken only in accordance

with the stipulations in rule 5 of the rules.

P.N.RAVINDRAN,
(JUDGE)
vps

WPC No.35713/2010 3

WPC No.35713/2010 4