High Court Kerala High Court

The Council Of Trustees Of … vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 2 April, 2008

Kerala High Court
The Council Of Trustees Of … vs The State Of Kerala Represented By … on 2 April, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 11146 of 2008(B)


1. THE COUNCIL OF TRUSTEES OF SHRIMATH
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE MANJESWAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPR, BY

                For Petitioner  :SRI.P.K.VIJAYAMOHANAN

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :02/04/2008

 O R D E R
                            PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J.
                        - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                           W.P.(c).No. 11146 OF 2008
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                    Dated this the 2nd day of April, 2008

                                  JUDGMENT

The grievance voiced by the petitioner which is the Council of

Trustees of Shrimath Anantheswar Temple is that the “Yatri Nivas”

which has been constructed by the temple has not been assigned door

number by the second respondent Panchayat. The reason for the

Panchayat not assigning door number to the Yatri Nivas building was

that the construction offends Section 220(b) of the Panchayat Raj Act.

Considering the request of the petitioner temple, the Panchayat adopted

Ext.P3 resolution deciding to assign door number provided sanction by

the Government is received in that regard. By Ext.P4, Ext.P3 has been

forwarded by the Panchayat to the Government. Ext.P2 issued by the

Deputy Director of Panchayat will show that the Deputy Director has

also recommended to the Government for a sympathetic consideration

of the petitioner’s request which is recommended by the Panchayat. The

petitioner’s immediate grievance is that the Government has not so far

WPC.No.11146/08 2

taken a decision on the request of the Panchayat. The petitioner has

recently alerted the Government by filing Ext.P5 comprehensive

representation apart from hearing Sri.M.V.Bose.

2. When this writ petition came up for admission,

Sri.M.V.Bose, standing counsel, has taken notice on behalf of the

second respondent and I have heard the submissions of

Sri.P.K.Vijayamohanan, counsel for the petitioner and also

Sri.K.J.Mohammed Anzar, Government Pleader who has taken notice

on behalf of the first respondent.

Having regard to the submissions addressed at the Bar and the

various documents placed on record by the petitioner, I am of the view

that it is necessary that the Government takes a decision on Ext.P1 as

reminded by Ext.P5 in the light of Exts.P2 and P3 at the earliest.

Accordingly, I dispose of the writ petition directing the

Government to take a decision on Ext.P1 as reminded by Ext.P5 taking

into account Exts.P2 letter and P3 resolution and the case of the

petitioner before this court that the properties on either side of the road

belong to the temple itself and if it becomes necessary , it may be

WPC.No.11146/08 3

possible for the temple to facilitate widening of the road by providing

sufficient land from the opposite side of the road. Orders as directed

above shall be passed by the Government at the earliest and at any rate

within two months of receiving a copy of this judgment.

PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE
JUDGE

sv.

WPC.No.11146/08 4