IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 24525 of 2009(I)
1. H.S. MUSTHATHICK,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF
... Respondent
For Petitioner :SMT.SUMATHY DANDAPANI (SR.)
For Respondent : No Appearance
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :08/09/2009
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J.
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
W.P.(C) No. 24525 of 2009
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Dated this the 8th day of September, 2009
JUDGMENT
Notice to respondents is dispensed with.
2. The petitioner seeks a direction for consideration and disposal of
Ext.P5 and also to quash Exts.P3 and P4. At the stage of admission, it was
noted on 26-8-2009 that the petitioner could challenge Ext.P4 in
appeal/revision before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions
and time had not run out for that by then.
3. As of now, the petitioner has filed appeal/revision against Ext.P4
before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions.
4. It appears that the private respondent carried a dispute between
the parties to the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions and
obtained Ext.P2 without the petitioner being on the array. Accordingly, the
learned counsel appearing for the petitioner points out that the petitioner
cannot be tied down to the findings, if any, in Ext.P2, while the Tribunal for
Local Self Government Institutions considers the appeal/revision against
W.P.(C) No. 24525/09 2
Ext.P4. This is a matter that could be considered in accordance with law by
the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions.
5. Taking into consideration the institution of the appeal/revision
before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, this writ petition
is ordered directing, without entering on merits, that the Tribunal will
consider all the contentions of the parties, including the petitioner’s plea that
Ext.P2 is not binding on him.
THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE.
mn.