IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2009 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 13531 of 2009(J) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- G. SANKARA PILLAI. S/O.GOVINDA PILLAI, AGED 57, SANKARAMANGALATH HOUSE, KRISHNAPURAM, KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. MR.MILLU DANDAPANI RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, KAYAMKULAM MUNICIPALITY, KAYAMKULAM. 2. THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.MATHEW VADAKKEL R1 BY ADV. MR.R.RAYA SHENOY, SC FOR KAYAMKULAM MUNI. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO. 13531/2009-J APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 21/03/1995 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 09/08/2001 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE PERMIT DATED 18/03/2004 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN FVOUR OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06/06/2008 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 22/11/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE PETITION DATED 31/03/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 11/02/2009 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rs/ THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 13531 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF JUNE, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner filed an appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions challenging a notice issued by the Secretary of the first respondent, Municipality. That appeal was presented on 16.12.2008. In Column 5 of that appeal memorandum, it was stated that notice was served on the petitioner on 17.11.2008. The respondent Municipality placed its file before the Tribunal and it filed written statement. On the basis of the file, the Tribunal noted the following in impugned Ext.P7 order. “Page 58 of the file produced by the respondent contains the signature affixed by Appellant on the reverse side of office copy of the impugned notice with the date 29.7.2008 indicating that the notice was received by the appellant on 29.7.2008. Hence apparently the WP(C)13531/2009 2 statement in Column No.5 of the Appeal Memorandum that impugned notice was received only on 17.11.2008 is not true”. The aforesaid is a finding of fact rendered by a Tribunal after perusing the files of the Municipality. The order refers to the endorsement shown to have been made by the writ petitioner. It is attributed to the writ petitioner. This finding is not only one of fact but is also one, that is not challenged in the writ petition as either unavailable on record or otherwise. It is also not shown by the petitioner that any other mode of service of notice is prescribed by law as mandatory and that service of notice as accepted by the Tribunal in the impugned order is insufficient. For the aforesaid reasons, this writ petition fails. The same is accordingly dismissed. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/6/6