Joseph Alexander vs The Paippadu Grama Panchayath
2021 Latest Caselaw 10630 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                              PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

     MONDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 8TH CHAITHRA, 1943

                     WP(C).No.38665 OF 2016(G)


PETITIONER:

              JOSEPH ALEXANDER
              AGED 53 YEARS
              JOSEPH ALEXANDER, S/O P.V.JOSEPH, PUTHUVELIL HOUSE,
              P.C.KAVALA P.O, PAIPPADU CHANGANASSERY,
              KOTTAYAM DISTRICT

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.GEORGE POONTHOTTAM (SR.)
              SMT.NISHA GEORGE

RESPONDENT:

              THE PAIPPADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
              REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PAIPPADU,
              NELIKODY P.O, CHANGANASSERY,
              KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-686548


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD           ON
29.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.38665 OF 2016(G)                       2




                                     JUDGMENT

Dated this the 29th day of March 2021

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:

(i) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate order or direction quashing Ext.P10.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondent Panchayat to number the basement floor, ground floor and first floor of the building covered in Exhibit P1 permit.

(iii) Issue such other writ, order or direction as this Hon'ble Court deems fit in the facts and circumstances of the case.

2. Apparently what was under challenge is a communication issued by the

Secretary of the Paippadu Grama Panchayat dated 5.10.2016, directing the

petitioner to close down the textile shop functioning in the building situated in

Re-Sy.No.449/6 of Paippadu Village.

3. Today when the matter is taken up, Sri.Reji Rajendran, representing

the learned counsel for petitioner on record in the writ petition, submitted that

subsequently the building was numbered. Therefore, the subject matter of this

writ petition has become infructuous.

Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed as infructuous recording the above

submission.

Sd/-

                                                        SHAJI P.CHALY

smv                                                           JUDGE