IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 20TH JULY 2010 / 29TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 22509 of 2010(K) -------------------------------- PETITIONERS: ---------------- 1. P.VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI, AGED 59 YEARS, S/O.VASUDEVAN NAMBOODIRI, PARAKKOT ILLAM, P.O. NAYARKUZHI, VIA NIT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 2. PRABHAKARAN V., AGED 61 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, THAROL HOUSE, P.O. NAYARKUZHI, VIA NIT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. BY MR.P.R.SREEJITH, ADVOCATE. MR.M.PROMODH KUMAR, ADVOCATE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------ 1. WIRELESS-TT INFO SERVICE LTD, CIRCLE OFFICE - J AND CO CHAMBERS, MANIMALA ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24, REPRSENTED BY SUDEVAN V.D., MANAGER, CIRCLE OFFICE, J AND CO CHAMBERS, MANIMALA ROAD, EDAPPALLY, KOCHI-24. 2. SREEDHARAN NAIR, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.SANKUNNI NAIR, 'SRUTHI', P.O. NAYARKUZHI, VIA NIT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT - 685 004. 3. THE SECRETARY, CHATHAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT- 685 005. 4. S.I. OF POLICE, MAVOOR POLICE STATION, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT- 685 004. BY MR.MUHAMMED MUSTAQUE, ADVOCATE FOR R1. MS.K.R. DEEPA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER FOR R4. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.22509 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of July, 2010. J U D G M E N T This writ petition is filed by the petitioners aggrieved by Exhibit P4 order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in I.A.No.791/2010 in appeal No.549/2010. The appeal is filed by the 1st respondent herein. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned counsel appearing for the 1st respondent who appeared on furnishing notice by the petitioners. 3. The petitioners are residents in Ward No.7 of the Chathamangalam Grama Panchayath. The 2nd respondent has allowed the 1st respondent to construct a tower in his property. It is the case of the petitioners that even though permit was initially issued by the Secretary of the Panchayath, by Exhibit P3 the same was cancelled. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioners contends that instead of filing an appeal before the Panchayath Committee, the W.P.(C) No.22509/2010 2 1st respondent filed an appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions and the Tribunal has passed the interim order Exhibit P4. It is pointed out that the Tribunal is not having the jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. 5. Learned counsel for the 1st respondent submitted that the Tribunal is well within its right to entertain the appeal and pass the interim order. Evidently, it is for the petitioners to approach the Tribunal to get themselves impleaded in the appeal and appraise the Tribunal about their objections in the matter including the objection regarding maintainability of the appeal. Exhibit P4 is only an interim order passed by the Tribunal in a pending appeal. 6. Therefore, in a writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is too premature for this Court to entertain the writ petition challenging the interim order passed by the Tribunal. Even though learned counsel for the petitioners vehemently contended that this Court at this stage can go into the question of jurisdiction of the Tribunal to entertain the appeal, it is only appropriate that the petitioners take up the W.P.(C) No.22509/2010 3 contentions before the Tribunal itself and the final order passed by the Tribunal can be challenged by the petitioners, if aggrieved, by filing a writ petition later. 7. In that view of the matter, I am not entertaining the writ petition. But, if the petitioners approach the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions for getting themselves impleaded in the appeal, the Tribunal will consider the application and hear the petitioners also in the appeal. Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the 1st respondent is proceeding with the construction and this Court may be pleased to stop the construction till orders are passed by the Tribunal. It is upto the petitioners to oppose the interim order by filing a proper application before the Tribunal. If such an application is filed by the petitioners, that also will be considered by the Tribunal. This writ petition is dismissed subject to the above observations. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp