IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 20081 of 2005(N)
1. C.KUMARAN,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE AKATHETHARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
... Respondent
2. T.E.GANESAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH
For Respondent :SRI.P.N.KRISHNANKUTTY ACHAN(SR.)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE
Dated :08/02/2007
O R D E R
PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
W.P.(C)No.20081 of 2005
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Dated: 8th February, 2007
JUDGMENT
I do not propose to go into the merits of the matter. Ext.R2(f)
notice was issued by the Panchayat to the petitioner and also to the
2nd respondent. The allegation in Ext.R2(f) is that both the writ
petitioner and the 2nd respondent have constructed ramps on the
Panchayat road illegally. To Ext.R2(f) the 2nd respondent has
submitted Ext.R2(g) objections. The petitioner’s allegation in Ext.P1
which he submitted before the Panchayat is that it is not a ramp
which was constructed but a pucca compound wall. Mr.Mohanakannan
would submit on the basis of the documents placed by the 2nd
respondent that the allegations in Ext.P1 are totally incorrect.
Whatever that be, since Ext.P1 and Ext.R2(g) are even now pending
before the Panchayat, it is only proper that the Panchayat takes a
decision on Ext.P1 and Ext.R2(g). Accordingly, this Writ Petition will
stand disposed of with the following directions:
The Panchayat will take up Ext.P1 and Ext.R2(g) together, issue
notice to the petitioner and the 2nd respondent, hear both of them
and take a decision on Ext.P1 and Ext.R2(g) at the earliest and at any
rate within six weeks of receiving a copy of this judgment. Once
W.P.C.No. 20081/05 – 2 –
decision is taken, the same will be communicated to the petitioner
and the 2nd respondent.
srd PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE