IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH MARCH 2010 / 26TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 5420 of 2010(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. PRABHEESH KUMAR, S/O.RAMAN, AGED 37 YEARS, MEDAPARAMBATHU, PUTHIYAPPA, PUTHIYANGADI P.O., ELATHOOR, KOZHIKODE. 2. PRASAD, S/O.RAMAN, AGED 35 YEARS, MEDAPARAMBATHU, PUTHIYAPPA, PUTHIYANGADI P.O., ELATHOOR, KOZHIKODE. BY ADV. SRI.SUKUL KHADER SRI.PEARSON S.FERNANDEZ RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, ELATHOOR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PUTHIYANGADI, KOZHIKODE. 3. CHITHRANGATHAN K., S/O.RAMAN, KUNJEELANTAGATH HOUSE, ELATHOOR P.O., KOZHIKODE. ADV. SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN FOR R2 SRI.RAJESH NAMBIAR FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.5420/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF TEMPORARY ORDER DATED 20/10/2009 ISSUED BY R2. P2 : COPY OF SHOW CAUSE NOTICE ISSUED BY R2 TO THE PETITIONERS. P3 : COPY OF REPLY DATED 26/10/2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TO R2. P4 : COPY OF ORDER DATED 27/01/2010 OF R1 SENT BY THE SECRETARY OF R1 TO THE PETITIONERS ON 06/02/2010. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.5420 of 2010 (B) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 17th day of March, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P4, an order passed by the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions. 2. From the facts pleaded, it would appear that the 2nd respondent passed an order finding that the petitioners have made certain unauthorised construction. Against that order, the petitioners filed an appeal before the Tribunal for Local self Government Institutions, and the said appeal is pending. In the meanwhile, it would appear that on the basis of a complaint made by the 3rd respondent, the 1st respondent passed Ext.P4 order directing implementation of the order passed by the Secretary against which the appeal is pending before the Tribunal. The order of the 1st respondent was also passed without notice to the petitioners. It is in these circumstances, this writ petition has been filed. 3. Having regard to the fact that the appeal against the WP(C) No.5420/2010 -2- order, that is now ordered to be implemented, is pending before the Tribunal, I feel further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 should await the disposal of the appeal that is pending before the Tribunal. 4. In view of this, this writ petition is disposed of directing that it will be open to the parties to expedite disposal of the appeal filed by the petitioners before the Tribunal. It is directed that in the meanwhile, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P4 will be kept in abeyance. It is clarified that directions in the judgment have been issued acting upon the averments of the petitioners regarding the pendency of the appeal, and if it is found that no such appeal is pending, it will be open to the Secretary to implement Ext.P4 order. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg