Kerala High Court
Ida Sarojam vs Sri. D.Mahesh Dev on 4 August, 2025
Author: Anil K. Narendran
Bench: Anil K. Narendran
CON.CASE(C) NO.1617 OF 2025 1 2025:KER:58199
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.
MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 13TH SRAVANA, 1947
CON.CASE(C)NO.1617 OF 2025
AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.03.2025 IN W.P.(C)NO.20849 OF 2024
OF THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN W.P.(C):
IDA SAROJAM
AGED 70 YEARS
W/O.ROY HESTING, DOOR NO.M.P/XIII/365, IDA HOUSE,
MOOLAKKADA, MUNNAR P.O., KDH VILLAGE, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI
DISTRICT, PIN - 685612
BY ADVS.
SRI.D.SAJEEV
SMT.RICHU THERESA ROBERT
RESPONDENT/4TH RESPONDENT IN W.P.(C):
SRI. D.MAHESH DEV
AGED 42 YEARS
S/O (NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER) THE ASST.SECRETARY &
SECRETARY-IN CHARGE WITH EFFECT FROM 15.05.2025, THE MUNNAR
GRAMA PANCHAYAT, OFFICE OF THE MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
MUNNAR, IDUKKI, PIN - 685612
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI. ARUN THOMAS, SC, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYAT
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
04.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO.1617 OF 2025 2 2025:KER:58199
JUDGMENT
Anil K. Narendran, J.
The petitioner has filed this contempt case alleging wilful disobedience of the direction contained in Annexure VI judgment dated 27.03.2025 of this Court in W.P.(C)No.20849 of 2024, which was disposed of with the direction contained in the last paragraph of that judgment. Paragraph 12 and also the last paragraph of that judgment read thus;
"12. The grievance of the petitioner at present is that by Ext.P18 order dated 03.05.2024, the 4th respondent, who is the Secretary of the 3rd respondent Munnar Grama Panchayat, has refused permission to construct a retaining wall. According to the petitioner, by Ext.P17 order dated 23.04.2024 the 4th respondent found that construction of a retaining wall is highly necessary. It is against that finding Ext.P18 order was passed subsequently. By Ext.P15 judgment dated 08.04.2024 this Court has directed the 3 rd respondent to reconsider the question of permission to construct a boundary wall (retaining wall) after issuing notice to all the neighbouring owners within a period of three weeks. It was in pursuance of that judgment Ext.P18 order was passed by the 4th respondent. However, from Ext.P18 it could be seen that it was a cryptic order passed by the 4th respondent without entering into the merits of the contentions raised by the parties. In such circumstances, we are of the considered opinion that Ext.P18 order is liable to be set aside.
CON.CASE(C) NO.1617 OF 2025 3 2025:KER:58199 Having considered the pleadings and materials on record and the submissions made at the Bar, and noting the urgency of the matter due to the fast approaching of the rainy season of the year, we deem it appropriate to dispose of this writ petition by setting aside Ext.P18 order dated 03.05.2024 passed by the 4th respondent Secretary of Munnar Grama Panchayat and directing the 4th respondent to reconsider the request made by the petitioner for construction of a retaining wall by the side of the property in question, as expeditiously as possible at any rate within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In that exercise, the 4th respondent shall hear all the parties concerned and give them an opportunity to raise their contentions. All the legal and factual contentions raised by the parties in this writ petition are left open to be raised before the 4th respondent."
2. On 11.07.2025, when this contempt case came up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Munnar Grama Panchayat submitted that the Secretary, who conducted a personal hearing pursuant to the direction contained in Annexure-VI judgment of this Court, has already been transferred to another Grama Panchayat. The Assistant Secretary, who is holding charge of the Secretary, has already issued a notice regarding the personal hearing scheduled on 16.07.2025.
3. Today, when this matter is taken up for consideration, the learned Standing Counsel for Munnar Grama Panchayat has CON.CASE(C) NO.1617 OF 2025 4 2025:KER:58199 made available for the perusal of this Court a copy of order No.A3.4216/2024 dated 18.07.2025 issued by the respondent Secretary of the Grama Panchayat, whereby the application made by the petitioner stands rejected, for the reason stated therein.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner proposes to challenge the said order passed by the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat, in appropriate proceedings.
After recording the aforesaid submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this contempt case is closed, without prejudice to the aforesaid right of the petitioner.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-
MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE MIN CON.CASE(C) NO.1617 OF 2025 5 2025:KER:58199 APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1617/2025 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure I TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.08.2022 IN W.P.(C) NO.28131 OF 2022 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT Annexure II TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.DICDK/4583/2022-DM4 DATED 17.12.2022 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT Annexure III TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 20.12.2023 IN W.P.(C) NO. 4700 OF 2023 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT Annexure IV TRUE COPY OF THE PERMISSION FOR CONSTRUCTION OF RETAINING WALL DATED 05.01.2024 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT Annexure V TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.04.2024 IN W.P.(C)NO.13943 OF 2024 Annexure VI CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.03.2025 IN WP(C) 20849/2024 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT Annexure VII TRUE COPY OF THE REMAINDER DATED 03.06.2025 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE RESPONDENT