Anirudhan P vs Pallikkal Grama Panchayath
2022 Latest Caselaw 6631 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 10062 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          ANIRUDHAN P
          AGED 43 YEARS
          S/O.BALAN, AMBATTANKUZHY VEEDU, KUMMINI PARAMBA.P.O,
          KARIPPOOR-673638.
          BY ADVS.
          C.S.MANILAL
          S.NIDHEESH


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE PALLIKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, PALLIKKAL.P.O,
          MALAPPURAM-673634.
    2     THE SECRETARY,
          PALLIKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PALLIKKAL.P.O,
          MALAPPURAM-673634.
    3     RISHI BANISH NALAKATH,
          S/O.ABDUL KARIM NALAKATH, NALAKATH HOUSE, NILAMBUR,
          MALAPPURAM-676542.
          BY ADVS.
          HARISH R. MENON
          R.SURAJ KUMAR
          ANJANA R.S.
          K.T.SHYAMKUMAR
          K.N.ABHA
          A.G.PRASANTH
          K.S.SREEJA
          OASHIN LALAN



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 10062 OF 2022
                                     2

               P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
              ------------------------------
             W.P.(C).No. 10062 of 2022
      ----------------------------------------------
       Dated this the 09th day of June, 2022

                            JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:

"(1) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the 2 nd respondent to take immediate action on Ext.P1 complaint of the petitioner within a time frame to be fixed by this Hon'ble court.

(2) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 2 nd respondent to issue stop memo against the illegal construction carried out by the 3 rd respondent as the same was done without any permit as evidenced by Ext.P3 and P4.

(3) Issue a writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction, directing the 3 rd respondent to stop all further construction until a decision is taken by the panchayath on Ext.P1 complaint.

(4) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the interest of justice."[SIC]

2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the

3rd respondent is making illegal construction by WP(C) NO. 10062 OF 2022

encroaching into the puramboke pathway without

obtaining permit from the Panchayath and thereby

denying access to the petitioner and his family to his

house. The petitioner submitted a complaint before

the 2nd respondent as evident by Ext.P1. The limited

prayer in the writ petition is for a consideration of

Ext.P1.

3. Heard counsel appearing for the petitioner,

the counsel appearing for the 1st and 2nd

respondents and also the counsel appearing for the

3rd respondent.

4. Counsel for the petitioner reiterated his

contentions in the writ petition. The counsel

appearing for the 3rd respondent submitted that the

allegation in the writ petition are absolutely

incorrect and there is no basis in the complaint. The

counsel appearing for the Panchayath submitted

that Ext.P1 will be considered in accordance to law,

after giving an opportunity of hearing to the

petitioner and the 3rd respondent. WP(C) NO. 10062 OF 2022

5. In the light of the above submission, I

think this writ petition itself can be disposed of

directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P1

complaint submitted by the petitioner, after giving

an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the

3rd respondent within a time frame.

Therefore this writ petition is disposed of in the

following manner:

i. The 2nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P1

and take appropriate steps in accordance to law, after

giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and

the 3rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within a period of one month from the date of

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

ii. I make it clear that, I have not considered the

matter on merit and the 2nd respondent is free to pass

appropriate orders in accordance to law.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN DM JUDGE WP(C) NO. 10062 OF 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10062/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH RECEIPT DATED 10.9.2021 EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER UNDER THE RTI ACT DATED 10.9.2021.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY TO THE APPLICATION UNDER RTI ACT BY THE PETITIONER DATED 6.10.2021 EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 6.11.2021.

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE