Mohammed Rasheed Kunnath vs The Kodur Grama Panchayath
2021 Latest Caselaw 19466 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
   THURSDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 25TH BHADRA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 17859 OF 2015
PETITIONER/S:

          MOHAMMED RASHEED KUNNATH,
          S/O.AHAMMEDKUTTY, KUNNATH HOUSE, VATTAPARAMBA,
          CHAPPANANGADI, PONMALA, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM
          DISTRICT.

          BY ADVS.
          SRI.BABU S. NAIR
          SRI.K.RAKESH



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE KODUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KODUR P.O, MALAPPURAM
          DISTRICT, 676 504.

    2     THE SECRETARY,
          THE KODUR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KODUR P.O, MALAPPURAM
          DISTRICT. 676 504.

    3     THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNER,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, 676 505.

          BY ADV SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN



          SRI.K.M.FAISAL, GP




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
16.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 17859 OF 2015


                                   -2-




                                JUDGMENT

Alleging that the petitioner has made certain constructions in breach of

the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act and Rules, 1994, the 2 nd

respondent, Secretary of the 1st respondent has issued a provisional order

under Section 235W1 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994. Petitioner has

filed Ext.P5 reply to the said notice. Petitioner has approached this Court

challenging Ext.P4 provisional order issued under Section 235W1 of the Act,

1994. This Court has passed an interim order on 15.06.2016, staying further

proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4. A further interim order is also passed

directing the Panchayat to number the building provisionally, subject to the

result of the writ petition.

2. Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for

the respondents.

3. Since, Ext.P4 order which is impugned in this writ petition is only a

provisional order under Section 235W1 of the Act, 1994, the same has to have

a logical conclusion. I therefore direct the 2 nd respondent to consider Ext.P5

reply submitted by the petitioner to Ext.P4 notice and pass appropriate orders WP(C) NO. 17859 OF 2015

thereon, after hearing the petitioner. The order as above shall be passed

within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. Number given to the building, if any, pursuant to the interim

order of this Court will be subject to the result of the writ petition. Till such

time, orders as above is passed, the interim order granted by this Court will

continue.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE

uu 17.09.2021 WP(C) NO. 17859 OF 2015

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17859/2015

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 25.10.14.

EXHIBIT P2. COP[Y OF THE CONSENT LETTER ISSUED BY ONE AYISHA, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER OF THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 7.4.15.

EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.4.15 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT AS NO.A2-561/15.

EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE REPLY SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 22.4.15.