IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15TH OCTOBER 2008 / 23RD ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 26465 of 2008(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- KARUNAKARAN.L., KONOTH KIZHAKKUMKARA PUTHENVEEDU, SATYAN NAGAR-ESTATE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.S.M.PREM SMT.K.P.SANTHI SRI.S.S.HUSSAIN SRI.P.K.NIJOY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPUAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. K.VIJAYAN, KONOTH KIZHAKKUMKARA PUTHENVEEDU, SATYAN NAGAR-ESTATE P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SRI. P.K. MANOJ KUMAR -SC GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.26465 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of October, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner challenges Ext.P4 order of the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions, whereby the Ombudsman had directed the 3rd respondent to demolish the alleged unauthorised construction made by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the petitioner was not heard before passing Ext.P4 order and therefore, Ext.P4 order is unsustainable. 2. On a reading of Ext.P4, I find that the Ombudsman had issued a notice to the petitioner, but he did not appear before the Ombudsman. The petitioner also does not dispute that he had been served a notice in the proceedings. That being so, the remedy of the petitioner lies in filing an appropriate petition before the Ombudsman to condone his non-appearance on the date of hearing and to hear him also before implementing the order. Without prejudice to such right, this writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd