T.K.Radhakrishna Pillai vs The Cheppad Grama Panchayat
2021 Latest Caselaw 16042 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  MONDAY, THE 2ND DAY OF AUGUST 2021 / 11TH SRAVANA, 1943
                    WP(C) NO. 28777 OF 2020
PETITIONER:

         T.K.RADHAKRISHNA PILLAI,
         AGED 66 YEARS,
         RESIDING AT THAZHAPPALLIL VEEDU,
         CHEPPAD KIZHAKUM MURI,
         CHEPPAD VILLAGE - 690 611.

         BY ADVS.
         Sri.R.RAJASEKHARAN PILLAI
         SMT.SABINA JAYAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE CHEPPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUTTAM P.O.,
         CHEPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690 511.
    2    THE CHEPPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, MUTTAM P.O.,
         CHEPPAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690 511.
    3    THE SECRETARY,
         CHEPPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
         MUTTAM P.O., CHEPPAD,
         ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT - 690 511.

         BY ADV SRI.K.V.ANIL KUMAR

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP    FOR
ADMISSION ON 02.08.2021,      THE COURT ON THE SAME     DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.28777/2020
                                 :2 :




                         JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 2nd day of August, 2021

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking

to quash Ext.P3 and to command the respondents to take up

Ext.P5 appeal and pass appropriate orders thereon.

2. By Ext.P3, the petitioner was required to remove

the encroachment and report the matter to the office of the

Secretary to the Grama Panchayat. The petitioner has filed

Ext.P5 appeal against Ext.P3 notice.

3. The learned Standing Counsel appearing for

respondents 1 to 3 submitted that the Panchayat has not

received Ext.P5 appeal memorandum allegedly sent by the

petitioner. The petitioner, however, has made available an

acknowledgment card endorsing the serving of Ext.P5 appeal

on the President of the Grama Panchayat. WP(C) No.28777/2020

4. Anyway, since Ext.P5 statutory appeal is now

available at Ext.P5, this Court is of the opinion that the 2 nd

respondent is duty bound to consider the appeal as the appeal

is of a statutory nature.

In the circumstances of the case, the writ petition is

disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P5

appeal and pass appropriate orders after granting an

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. Orders in this regard

shall be passed within a period of two months. The 2 nd

respondent may resort to virtual mode for hearing the

petitioner if the situation so warrants. The benefit of the

interim order dated 22.12.2020 passed by this Court in this

writ petition will continue to enure to the petitioner till orders

are passed on Ext.P5 appeal.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/03.08.2021 WP(C) No.28777/2020

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28777/2020

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE KAYCHIT IN OS NO.283/1993.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN IA NO.2422/2015 DATED 27/1/2017 IN OS NO.407/15 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT HARIPAD.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 19/10/2020 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S LAWYER'S NOTICE DATED 23/10/2020 TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL DATED 3/11/2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE R3(a) A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION SENT THROUGH MAIL BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

SR