IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 27TH OCTOBER 2009 / 5TH KARTHIKA 1931 RP.No. 980 of 2009(D) --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.20878/2009 Dated 27/07/2009 .................... REVIEW PETITIONER/ RESPONDENT NO.4 ------------------------------------- K.P.POULOSE, KOIKKARA PANAKKALODI HOUSE, NEDUMKULANGARA MALA, KUSUMAGIRI P.O. KAKKANAD, KOCHI. BY ADV. SRI.K.T.THOMAS RESPONDENTS/PETITIONERS/RESPONDENTS 1 TO 3 --------------------------------------------- 1. KHALID, MANNARKOTTU MOOLA, KUSUMAGIRI P.O.,ATHANI, KAKKANAD. 2. ABDUL AZEEZ, MUKALARKUDI, KUZHIVELIPPADI, EDATHALA P.O.ERNAKULAM. 3. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THRIKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, THRIKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY THRIKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THRIKKAKARA, KAKKANAD. 5. THE SECRETARY, THRKKAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, THRIKKAKARA, KAKKANAD. BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.SUNILKUMAR THIS REVIEW PETITION HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- R.P. No.980 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.20878 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 27th October,2009 O R D E R Fourth respondent in the writ petition has come up with this application for review alleging that material facts were not brought to the notice of this Court by the writ petitioners. It is alleged that the writ petitioners are encroachers of a public road and they are continuing in occupation of the same. The writ petition was filed challenging Exts.P11 and and P12 eviction notices issued by the Secretary of the Panchayat. One of the reliefs sought for in the writ petition relates to Exts.P9 and P10 applications filed by the petitioners before the Punchayat under Rule 3 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Removal of Encroachment and Imposition and Recovery of Penalty6 for unauthorised occupation) Rules 1996. This Court did not go into the merits of the contention raised against Exts. P11 and P12. Writ petitioners were permitted to prefer an appeal against Exts.P11 and P12 and a direction was issued to the Panchayat to consider the appeal, if any, R.P. No.980 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.20878 of 2009 2 filed, along with Exts.P9 and P10. 2. According to the review petitioner, no appeal could have been maintained against Exts.P11 and P12. Reference in this regard is made to Annexure 8 decision stated to have been taken on 19.12.2007 which according to the review petitioner shows that an appeal preferred against the eviction notices issued to the writ petitioners by the Panchayat earlier, were considered and therefore, further appeal against Exts.P11 and P12 is not maintainable, it is contended. 3. It is clear from the documents produced along with the review petition and the materials placed on record in the writ petition as also I.A No.9325 of 2009 filed in the writ petition that the review petitioner has locus standi, to question any order that may be passed by the Panchayat at the instance of the writ petitioners. In fact, he was made a party to the writ petition. 4. Heard the counsel for the review petitioner, counsel for the writ petitioners and the counsel for the Panchayat. R.P. No.980 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.20878 of 2009 3 5. It is now submitted by the learned counsel for the writ petitioners that pursuant to the judgment of this Court, the Panchayat has taken a decision on the appeal filed by the writ petitioners against Exts.P11 and P12. 6. In the circumstances, all that is required is to clarify that it is open to the review petitioner to challenge the decision of the Panchayat stated to have been taken on 16.9.2009 and also seek appropriate remedies, if so advised, in relation to the communication issued to the writ petitioners on 15.10.2009. It will also be open to the review petitioner to contend for the position that an appeal was not maintainable against Exts. P11 and P12 in the writ petition. Obviously, if any, proceedings are instituted by the review petitioner, the writ petitioner shall also be heard before a decision is taken by the competent Authority/Forum in that regard. Review petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma R.P. No.980 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.20878 of 2009 4 R.P. No.980 of 2009 in W.P ( C) No.20878 of 2009 5