IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 11TH MARCH 2010 / 20TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 8060 of 2010(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. SUDHA, MANATHARA HOUSE, POTHAPALLY, KUMARAPURAKM NOW RESIDING AT KARADAMPALLIL, PLAPPUZHA NORTH, HARIPAD 2. R. MOHANA KUMARAN NAIR, PRASANTHI, THULAMPARAMBU NORTH, MANNARASSALA P.O., HARIPAD. 3. VIJAYAN NAIR.P,INDIRA VIHAR, T.P. CENTRE, HARIPAD. BY ADV. SRI.P.SREEKUMAR SRI.K.S.MANU (PUNUKKONNOOR) SRI.V.K.RAJANANDAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPREENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, HARIPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, HARIPAD. 3. HARIPAD GRAMA PANCHAYATH COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT, HARIPAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, HARIPAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO.8060 OF 2010 (F) -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioners 1 to 3 own certain commercial buildings, ownership of which is sought to be substantiated by Exts.P1 to P6. According to them, these buildings have been numbered, tax has been levied and the same is being paid without default. While so, the Panchayat issued Ext.P9 to the first petitioner on the allegation that the building was constructed in violation of Section 220-(b) of the Panchayat Raj Act and that was explained in Ext.P9. According to the petitioners there was no further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P9. While so, petitioners were issued Exts.P11 to P13 notices requiring them to demolish the construction mentioned therein. On receipt of these notices they filed Ext.P14 to Ext.P16 reply and the matter is pending consideration of the Panchayat. Meanwhile, it is stated that the first respondent has issued Ext.P18 order dated 17.11.2009, directing the Panchayat to cancel the number, electricity connection, water connection and telephone connection etc. Petitioner apprehends that even in spite of the pendency of the WPC.No.8060 /2010 :2 : proceedings, by Exts.P11 to P13 the Panchayat might take further action based on Ext.P18. It is with this apprehension that this writ petition is filed. 2. If as a matter of fact there is violation of the provisions contained in the Panchayat Raj Act, in respect of any structure constructed, it is well within the power of the Panchayat to initiate action. This the Panchayat already done by Exts.P11 to P13 referred to above. Petitioners have filed their replies in Exts.P14 to P16. Therefore at this stage what is required is that the Panchayat should finalize the proceedings independent of the findings of the Government as reflected in Ext.P18. Therefore the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions. i. That the Panchayat sall pass orders on Exts.P11 to P13, considering Exts.P14 to P16 affidavits filed by the petitioners. This the Panchayat shall do with notice to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within 4 weeks from the date of production of a copy of this judgment. ii. It is directed that in the meanwhile further proceedings based on Ext.P18 shall be kept in abeyance. WPC.No.8060 /2010 :3 : Petitioner shall produce a copy of the judgment before the 2nd respondent along with a copy of this writ petition. (ANTONY DOMINIC) JUDGE vi/