Remya J vs The State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 19685 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
                    WP(C) NO. 15128 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

         REMYA J,
         AGED 42 YEARS,
         W/O. S.V PRASEED,
         NANDANAM,
         MEEYANA P.O., OYOOR,
         KOTTARAKARA TALUK,
         KOLLAM DISTRICT.

         BY ADV SYAM J SAM


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE STATE OF KERALA,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
         LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,
         GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001
    2    THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY,
         KUNDARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
         KUNDARA P.O, KOLLAM PIN 691 502
    3    RATHEESH R,
         ROSH BHAVAN, MULAVANA P.O.,
         KUNDARA, KOLLAM PIN 691 503
    4    TALUK SURVEYOR,
         KOLLAM TALUK,
         CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM 691 012
         BY ADVS.
         R2 BY SHRI.MANOJ RAMASWAMY, SC, KUNDARA GRAMA
         PANCHAYAT
         SHRI.B.N.SHIVSANKAR
         SHRI.TINU T.JOSEPH
         SMT.ARCHANA HARIDAS K.
         SHRI.HOSH P. DAS
         SRI.VIPIN NARAYANAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP     FOR
ADMISSION ON 17.09.2021,      THE COURT ON THE SAME      DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.15128/2021
                                  :2 :




                          JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 17th day of September, 2021

Aggrieved by the illegal and unauthorised

construction made by the 3rd respondent, the petitioner has

approached this Court seeking to consider Ext.P7

representation submitted by her to the Grama Panchayat

authorities.

2. When this writ petition came up for hearing today,

the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that on receipt

of a notice in the writ petition, the Secretary has now passed

an order dated 17.08.2021 rejecting the representation of the

petitioner. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that the said order was passed without giving an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner and without giving a chance to

produce requisite documents before the Secretary. WP(C) No.15128/2021

3. Since the Secretary has already passed an order

pursuant to the representation submitted by the petitioner, the

course open to the petitioner is to challenge that order in

appropriate proceedings.

In such circumstances, the writ petition is dismissed

granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order dated

17.08.2021 now passed by the Secretary to the Grama

Panchayat.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/17.09.2021 WP(C) No.15128/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15128/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

Exhibit P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT PROPERTY COVERED BY THE AFOREMENTIONED RELEASE DEED Exhibit P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMISSION ISSUED TO THE THIRD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER RTI ACT GIVEN TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT Exhibit P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ANSWER UNDER RTI ACT, 2005 Exhibit P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT. Exhibit P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT GIVEN BY LATE RAMESHAN WHICH WAS PRODUCED DURING PLAN CHANGE BY THE THIRD RESPONDENT Exhibit P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER TO THE SECOND RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P8 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION GIVEN TO THE PETITIONER TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT OF THE THIRD RESPONDENT PROPERTY.

SR