IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 30TH NOVEMBER 2009 / 9TH AGRAHAYANA 1931 WP(C).No. 34275 of 2009(D) ---------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- M/S.SALSABEEL CHARITABLE & EDUCATIONAL TRUST, PERAMANGALAM P.O., THRISSUR, REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY P.H.HAMEED, 56, S/O.HASSAN, PODIPARACKAL HOUSE, 11/506, AMBADY LANE, KOKKALA, THRISSUR-680 021. BY ADVS. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN, MR.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH). RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE KAIPARAMBU GRAMA PANCHAYATH MUNDOOR P.O., REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, THRISSUR DISTRICT. R1 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30/11/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO.34275 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 30TH DAY OF NOVEMBER, 2009 JUDGMENT By the impugned Ext.P4, the petitioner has been called upon to show further cause against the proposed action to demolish a portion of a school building. The learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the replies to the first notice was not addressed and petitioner was not given an opportunity of hearing. It is further pointed out that the reasons stated in Ext.P4 are totally different from those put against the petitioner at the earlier point of time. Yet the petitioner has to get a final decision on Ext.P4, and then the petitioner would have the opportunity to seek relief from the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. There is no reason to assume that the panchayat would conclude the Wpc 34275/09 2 proceedings and enforce it without hearing the petitioner, in accordance with law, in answer to Ext.P4 and give the petitioner reasonable time to move the Tribunal if the decision of the Panchayat Secretary is against it. The writ petition is hence dismissed without prejudice to the petitioner seeking relief as aforesaid. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/1/12