IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MRS.MANJULA CHELLUR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 15TH NOVEMBER 2011 / 24TH KARTHIKA 1933 WA.No. 1633 of 2011() ---------------------------- APPELLANT(S): -------------------- ZUBAIDA.V.K, W/O. ABDUL GAFOOR, AGED 45 YEARS, GRACIOUS HOUSE, MUTHUVALLUR.P.O, NEERAD. KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.PRAVEEN KUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ---------------------- 1. KONDOTTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673 638. 2. THE SECRETARY, KONDOTTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673 638. 3. HAROON MOHAMMED.P, THE CONVENOR, NEERAD AM LP SCHOOL DRINKING WATER PROJECT, MUTHUVALUR.P.O, NEERAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 678 638. 4. T.MUHAMMED, S/O.ABDURAHIMAN, AGED 55 YEARS, NELLIKUNNU VEEDU, MUTHUVALLOOR.P.O., NEERAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 638. 5. P.ABOOBACKER, S/O.MAMAD HAJI, CHERUTHODI HOUSE, MUTHAVALLOOR.P.O., NEERAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 638. 6. P.P.ABDUL MAJEED, S/O.MAMMOOTTY MASTER, MANAGER, AMLP SCHOOL, NEERAD, MUTHUVALLOOR.P.O., NEERAD, KONDOTTY, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-673 638. R1 AND R2 BY ADV.SRI.P.VENUGOPAL. R3 BY ADV.SRI.K.JAJU BABU. R4 TO R6 BY ADV.SRI.R.SUBISH THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15/11/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: MANJULA CHELLUR, Ag.C.J & P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ---------------------------------------------- W.A.No. 1633 of 2011 ---------------------------------------------- Dated this the 15th day of November, 2011 JUDGMENT Manjula Chellur, Ag.C.J. The appellant before us is an unsuccessful writ petitioner before the learned Single Judge, who sought a direction to the second respondent for restoration of water supply under the Neerad AMLP School Drinking Water Project to the house of the appellant. According to the appellant, though the water connection was given to her by collecting amount as per Exhibit P1, later on the same came to be disconnected as indicated at Exhibit P2. The stand of the respondents before the learned Single Judge was that though the statement of water connection to the house of the appellant was true, the fact remains that there was no submission of proper application for the said water connection and there was no resolution of the Society as such granting connection to the house of the appellant. WA.1633/11 2 2. The learned Single Judge, after considering all the facts and circumstances, in spite of the fact that the appellant was enjoying the water connection for some time opined that said connection was not in accordance with the procedure contemplated. However, reserved liberty to seek such water connection under the Neerad AMLP School Drinking Water Project. Aggrieved by the same, the present appeal is filed. 3. According to learned counsel for the appellant, he is not in a position to say who exactly from the Society collected money under Exhibit P1 and who was the one who sanctioned water connection to the house of the appellant. As against this, the third respondent's stand is that the format for issuance of receipt is as per Exhibit R4(a) and not as indicated at Exhibit P1. Even otherwise the contents of Exhibit P1 dated 1.11.2010 would indicate that this is only a notice calling upon the appellant to pay certain amount giving last date for payment of the charges for water connection and another date 10.11.2010 as the last date for payment of connection charges with fine. Subsequent to 1.11.2010, whether the appellant ever attempted to pay any WA.1633/11 3 amount or has in fact deposited the amount, we do not have any material before us. In that view of the matter, we are only of the view that if at all there was some water connection to the house of the appellant, it is not in accordance with the procedure adopted by the Society. Therefore, the learned Single Judge was justified in rejecting the reliefs sought by the appellant. So far as the concession shown by the learned Single Judge and in the light of the information given to us today, there are only five applications pending out of which two applications would be complied with any moment and the remaining three would be considered in course of time. The third respondent has also come out with a statement that they have no prejudice against the appellant, provided she seeks membership of the Society and applies for water connection as any other member of the Society does. In the light of the above submissions, without interfering with the judgment of the learned Single Judge, we only direct the appellant to become a member to comply with the procedure to get the water connection from the concerned Society and on WA.1633/11 4 submission of such application, the third respondent would consider the application and do the needful in accordance with the procedure contemplated based on priority basis. The Writ Appeal is disposed of as above. MANJULA CHELLUR, ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, , JUDGE vgs