IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN FRIDAY, THE 22ND JANUARY 2010 / 2ND MAGHA 1931 WA.No. 105 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.33035/2009 Dated 18/11/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ----------------- 1. THOTTIYIL MUHAMMED S/O.MUHAMMED, KOTTUVAD, P.O.PUZHAKKATTIRI MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. SAMYUKTA SAMARASAMITHI PUZHAKKATTIRI,MALAPPURAM DISTRICT REP BY ITS PRESIDENT R.RAMACHANDRAN 3. P.RAJAN, S/O.VELAYUDHAN PUZHAKKATTIRI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.M.SATHYANATHA MENON RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. PUZHAKKATTIRI GRAMA PANCHAYATH REP. BY ITS SECRETARY,PUZHAKKATTIRI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. PUZHAKKATTIRI GRAMA PANCHAYATH REP BY ITS PRESIDENT, PUZHAKKATTIRI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 3. M/S.VALLUVANAD WOOD CONSORTIUM (P) LTD P.O.CHERUKKAPARAMBU, PERINTHALAMANNA MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R.RAMAN & P.S.GOPINATHAN, JJ. ------------------------------- Writ Appeal No.105 of 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 22nd day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Raman, J. Appellants, who are the writ petitioners in W.P.(C) No.33035 of 2009, have approached this Court raising a grievance that the third respondent is establishing a factory without permission of the Grama Panchayat. The Panchayat had already rejected the third respondent's application, which was subsequently set side by the Tribunal, on an appeal filed by the third respondent, directing the Panchayat to reconsider the matter. Therefore, as of now, there is no licence and the matter is pending before the Panchayat. The learned Judge, while dismissing the Writ Petition, however reserved the right of the petitioners, if any, to move the Civil or other jurisdiction for relief. WA.No.105 of 2010 : 2 : 2. According to the appellants/petitioners, at the time of re-consideration of the matter by the Panchayat, he may also be heard in the matter. Since, the Writ Petition was dismissed in limine, we could not hear the Panchayat or the affected parties. However, if any representation is made raising any grievance in the matter, the same shall also be considered by the Panchayat, while disposing of the application filed by the third respondent afresh. 3. The appellants shall produce a copy of this writ appeal along with a copy of the judgment before the second respondent, Panchayat, for information and compliance. The Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. P.R.RAMAN, JUDGE P.S.GOPINATHAN, JUDGE nj.