Philip Thomas vs State Of Kerala
2024 Latest Caselaw 5990 Ker

Kerala High Court

Philip Thomas vs State Of Kerala on 23 February, 2024

Author: Murali Purushothaman

Bench: Murali Purushothaman

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN
    FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 4TH PHALGUNA, 1945
                        WP(C) NO. 7329 OF 2024
PETITIONER:

          PHILIP THOMAS, AGED 52 YEARS
          S/O. THOMAS SKARIAH,
          PERKKOTT PADINJATTEMURIYIL, ELANTHOOR P.O.,
          PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 689643

          BY ADVS.
          VISHAK.K.JOHNSON
          R.SANTHOSH BABU



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY,
          DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS,
          STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

    2     THE ELANTHOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
          ELANTHOOR P.O., PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689643

    3     THE SECRETARY
          ELANTHOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, ELANTHOOR P.O.,
          PATHANNAMTHITTA, PIN - 689643
          R BY GP SMT.DEVISREE
          R BY SRI.ARUN B.VARGHESE,SC


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 7329 OF 2024             : 2 :




                        JUDGMENT

According to the petitioner, he is running a

meat stall in the public market under the control of

the 2nd Panchayat for the last more than 24 years.

The Panchayat is proposing to construct a new

shopping complex and the petitioner has been asked

to shift his stall to an alternative place. The

petitioner submits that the alternative place

suggested by the Panchayat is in a dilapidated

condition and he shall be given a reasonable time to

relocate the stall. He has submitted Ext.P2

representation before the 3rd respondent in this

regard.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

learned Government Pleader and the learned

Standing Counsel for the Panchayat.

3. The learned Standing Counsel, on

instructions, submits that Ext.P2 representation is

not received by the 2nd respondent and if the

petitioner produces a copy of the same, the same

shall be considered in accordance with law, if

otherwise in order.

4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the

petitioner to produce the copy of Ext.P2

representation before the 3rd respondent forthwith.

On receipt of the same, the 3 rd respondent shall pass

orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within a period of one week therefrom. Till

such time, the petitioner shall not be evicted from

the present premises. The petitioner shall produce a

copy of this writ petition along with a copy of the

judgment before the 3rd respondent for due

compliance.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN JUDGE SB

APPENDIX

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT NO.

1230200238/G030403 FOR PAYMENT DATED 02/05/2023 ISSUED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 22/02/2024