IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE MONDAY, THE 14TH JANUARY 2008 / 24TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 18482 of 2007(A) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: ------------ 1. AHAMMED KABEER, S/O.ASANARU KUNJU, AGED 47 YEARS, CHINJU MANZIL, ELAMPALLOOR, KUNDARA P.O., KOLLAM. 2. NABESATH BEEVI, CHINJU MANZIL, ELAMPALLOOR, KUNDARA P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SURESH KUMAR SRI.LEO GEORGE RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. ELAMPALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ELAMPALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KUNDARA P.O., KOLLAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, ELAMPALLOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KUNDARA P.O., KOLLAM. 3. K.SIVASANKARA PILLAI, SAJU BHAVAN, ELAMPALLOOR, KUNDARA P.O., KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR SRI.V.BHASKARAN PILLAI SRI.B.VINOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 14/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO. 18482/07 APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS:- P1: True copy of the building permit issued by the 2nd respondent to the petitioners dated 6-11-2003. P2: True copy of the plan approved by the panchayat for the construction of the building of the petitioners dated 6-11-2003. P2(a): True copy of the plan approved by the Panchayat for the construction of the building of the petitioners dated 6-11-2003 P3: True copy of the notice issued bythe Secretary of the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram to the petitioner, dated nil P4: True copy of the complaint filed by the third respondent before the Ombudsman for Local Self Government, Thiruvananthapuram dated 11-9-2006 P6: True copy of the order passed by the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions in Original Petition No.730/2006 dated 26- 4-2007 P7: True copy of the statement filed by the Panchayat before the Ombudsman dated 22-1-2007 Pius C. Kuriakose, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 18482 of 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of January,2008 JUDGMENT No counter affidavit has been filed so far, even though several chances were given to the respondent panchayat. The ground urged by the petitioners is that Ext.P5 order was passed without hearing them. 2. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, I set aside Ext.P5 order without going into the merits of other grounds urged in the writ petition. Hence, the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram is directed to take a fresh decision on the issue, i.e., the complaint filed by the 3rd respondent, after hearing the petitioners and the 3rd respondent. The order as directed above shall be passed as early as possible, at any rate within three months from the date of receipt of copy of this judgment. Pius C. Kuriakose, Judge. mn. 2