IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN THURSDAY, THE 18TH NOVEMBER 2010 / 27TH KARTHIKA 1932 WP(C).No. 34612 of 2010(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- ALEEMA BEEVI, AGED 65 YEARS, W/O.BAVAKUTTY, H.NO.901, KALATHIPARAMBU ROAD, PALLURUTHY, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.A.X.VARGHESE SRI.A.V.JOJO RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KOCHI CORPORATION COUNCIL, REP. BY MAYOR, KOCHI - 682 031. 2. CORPORATION OF KOCHI, REP. BY SECRETARY, KOCHI - 682 031. BY SRI.S.RAMESH BABU, SC FOR R1 AND R2. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18/11/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.34612 of 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 18th day of November, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner encroached upon a portion of the road poramboke vested in the Cochin Corporation and put up a building therein. Since it affect the flow of water along a drain, proceedings were initiated to evict him. Ultimately Ext.P1 order was passed on 6.8.2007 directing the petitioner to remove the encroachment by demolishing the construction within seven days and to report compliance. The petitioner challenged the said order before the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions. By Ext.P2 order passed on 22.4.2010 the said petition was rejected holding that it is not maintainable. It is stated that the petitioner has thereupon filed Ext.P3 appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions by sending the original thereof by registered post on 15.11.2010. In this writ petition the petitioner seeks a direction to the second respondent to keep in abeyance further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1 till Ext.P3 appeal is heard and disposed of. W.P(C).No.34612 of 2010 -:2:- 2. Ext.P1 order was passed way back on 6.8.2007. The mere fact that the petitioner had resorted to a wrong remedy by moving the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions is not a reason, which according to me, would enable the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions to condone the long delay of more than three years in challenging Ext.P1 order. Under the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 and Rule 8 of the Tribunal for the Kerala Local Self Government Institutions Rules, 1999 the Tribunal cannot condone the delay of more than 30 days in filing appeals or revision petitions. In the instant case the delay in filing the appeal is more than three years. The Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions is therefore not competent or empowered to condone the delay. The petitioner has also not challenged Ext.P1 in this writ petition. In such circumstances I am of the opinion that no relief can be granted in this writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed. P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.P(C).No.34612 of 2010 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 18th November, 2010