High Court Kerala High Court

Kattumurackal Muslim Jama-Ath vs State Of Kerala on 25 January, 2008

Kerala High Court
Kattumurackal Muslim Jama-Ath vs State Of Kerala on 25 January, 2008
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 3104 of 2008(T)


1. KATTUMURACKAL MUSLIM JAMA-ATH,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



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

2. CHIRAYINKEEZHU GRAMA PANCHAYATH,

3. THE SECRETARY(SPECIAL GRADE),

4. M.A.HAMZA,S/O ABOOBACKER,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.PATHIRIPALLY S.KRISHNAKUMARI

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

 Dated :25/01/2008

 O R D E R
                         PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.
               - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                        W.P.(C) No.3104 of 2008
                - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                        Dated: 25th January, 2008

                                JUDGMENT

Ext.P9 order has been passed by the Panchayat pursuant to the

directions which had been given by the Tribunal for Local Self

Government Institutions in its order Ext.P4. Even though Ext.P9 has

been assailed in this Writ Petition on various grounds, since factual

disputes are coming up for determination, I am of the view that the

petitioner has to avail his statutory appellate remedies before the

Tribunal on Ext.P9. I dispose of the Writ Petition relegating the

petitioner to the statutory appellate remedies before the Tribunal for

Local Self Government Institutions. Considering the very short time

frame given in the order of the Panchayat for implementing its order,

there will be a direction to the Panchayat not to enforce its order

directing demolition of the building for a period of one month. The

petitioner is permitted to urge all available grounds in the prospective

appeal which will be filed by him against Ext.P9. The Tribunal shall

not be influenced by its earlier decision while considering the

prospective appeal. The petitioner can appeal also against Ext.P10 by

which the petitioner’s application for regularisation has been rejected.

The Writ Petition is disposed of as above.

srd                                     PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

W.P.C.No.    - 2 -