IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 17TH MAY 2010 / 27TH VAISAKHA 1932 WP(C).No. 13437 of 2010(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.SIVADASA PANICKER, S/O. RAMANKUTTY PANICKER, AGED 44 YEARS, KALARIKKAL HOUSE, KOTTAPPURAM, KARIMPUZHA PANCHAYATH, PALAKKAD DIST. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE KARIMPUZHA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ALIPPU, S/O. LATE KUNHALAVI, PADUVIL HOUSE, KOTTAPPURAM.P.O., KARIMPUZHA PANCHAYATH, OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DIST. 3. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SREEKRISHNAPURAM POLICE STATION, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. R1 BY G.P. SMT. N. SUDHA DEVI ADV. SRI.V.CHITAMBARESH, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R2 SRI.T.C.SURESH MENON FOR R2 SRI.JIBU P THOMAS FOR R2 SRI.P.S.APPU FOR R2 SRI.A.R.NIMOD FOR R2 SRI.C.A.ANOOP FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXT.P1-TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE DATED 24.5.2000 ISSUED FROM THE DISTRICT HOSPITAL, PALAKKAD. EXT.P2-TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED OF SRO, MANNARKKAD EXT.P3-TRUE COPY OF BUILDING PERMIT DATED 5.9.2008 ISSUED BY R1 EXT.P4-TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 5.11.2008 ISSUED BY R1 EXT.P5-TRUE COPY OF EXPLANATION DATED 9.12.2008 SUBITTED BY THE PETITIONERs EXT.P6-TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 26.6.2009 ISSUED BY R1 EXT.P7-TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DT.9.4.2010 ISSUED BY R1 RESPONDENTS' EXTS: EXT.R2(A)-TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE OMBUDSMAN DATED 10.11.2009 EXT.R2(B)-TRUE COPY OF COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT TO THE FIRST RESPONDENT ON 26.4.2010 EXT.R2(C)-TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION PREFERRED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT DT.3.9.2008,. // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 13437 of 2010-D - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 17th day of May, 2010. JUDGMENT The writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging Exts.P6 and P7 communications issued by the Panchayat. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second respondent. 3. While admitting the writ petition, this Court passed an interim order on 20.4.2010 directing to maintain status-quo until further orders. 4. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for the second respondent submits that the petitioner has got an effective remedy to approach the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions by challenging Exts.P6 and P7. It is submitted that under the guise of the interim order, the petitioner cannot make any construction also. 5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the order Ext.P6, even though dated 26.6.2009, was not communicated to the petitioner and he came to know about it only when he received Ext.P7 notice. It is therefore submitted that the appeal, if filed, may be treated as time barred, as the order is dated 26.6.2009. It is submitted that the petitioner will resort wpc 13437/2010 2 to the remedy of filing appeal, within the time allowed by this Court. 6. In the light of the above factual scenario, the petitioner will file an appeal against Exts.P6 and P7, within a period of three weeks from today. It will be treated as filed within time. The interim order passed by this Court will continue till the Tribunal pass appropriate interim orders on the appeal to be filed by the petitioner. It is made clear that the petitioner will not make any additional construction based on the order of status-quo issued by this Court. The Tribunal will dispose of the appeal on merits, after hearing the petitioner, the Panchayat as well as the second respondent and after calling for relevant records. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/