Mundayattu Veettil Manoharan vs Eramam - Kuttoor Grama Panchayat

Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6689 Ker
Judgement Date : 9 June, 2022

Kerala High Court
Mundayattu Veettil Manoharan vs Eramam - Kuttoor Grama Panchayat on 9 June, 2022
WP(C) NO. 10912 OF 2019              1



                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                          WP(C) NO. 10912 OF 2019
PETITIONER/S:

               MUNDAYATTU VEETTIL MANOHARAN,
               AGED 54 YEARS
               S/O.KUNHIRAMAN, RESIDING AT ERAMAM AMSOM,
               MATHAMANGALAM DESOM, TALIPARAMBA, KANNUR DISTRICT.

               BY ADV M.V.AMARESAN



RESPONDENT/S:

      1        ERAMAM - KUTTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
               REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, P.O.MATHAMANGALAM
               BAZAR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670306.

      2        SECRETARY,
               ERAMAM - KUTTOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, P.O. MATHAMANGALAM
               BAZAR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670306.

      3        ADDL.R3.SHRI.KRISHNA PODUVAL,
               ARAYULLA VEETTIL, RETD. TEACHER, H.NO.EKP XIV-931,
               NEAR TRIPPANIKKUNNU MAHADEVA KSHETHRAM,
               MATHAMANGALAM BAZAR KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 306.
               IS IMPLEADED AS ADDL.R3 AS PER ORDER DATED
               04.06.2019 IN IA.NO.1/2019.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.M.SASINDRAN
               SRI.MAHESH V RAMAKRISHNAN
               SRI.K.PRAMOD

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 10912 OF 2019               2




                         P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                   --------------------------------------------
                       W.P.(C.) No. 10912 of 2019
                      --------------------------------------
                  Dated this the 9th day of June, 2022


                                 JUDGMENT

The counsel for the petitioner submitted that the prayers in the writ petition are infructuous.

Therefore, this writ petition is dismissed as infructuous.

SD/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS