IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 2ND FEBRUARY 2010 / 13TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3340 of 2010(N) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- T.K.MANI, S/O.KUMARAN, THEKKUMKATTIL HOUSE, MULANTHURUTHY.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.N.CHANDRABABU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THRIKKAKARA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE RDO, FORT KOCHI,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 4. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,MULANTHURUTHY, MULANTHURUTHY.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, SHO MULANTHURUTHY, MULANTHURUTHY.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 6. THE MULANTHURUTHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, MULANTHURUTHY.P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 7. LOCAL LEVAL MONITORING COMMITTEE, MULANTHURUTHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN. 8. THE COCHIN SHIPYARD STAFF CO-OPERATIVE HOUSE CONSTRUCTION SOCIETY LTD.,REP BY ITS SECRETARY, COCHIN SHIPYARD LIMITED, COCHIN 682015 WPC NO.3340/2010 9. AARATHI SANTHOSH,VANMELIL THAZHAMANA HOUSE,MULANTHURUTHY P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 10. GEORGE, S/O.ITTAN, KOLLIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMBILLY, ERNAKULAM. 11. EALIYAMMA, W/O. GEORGE, KOLLIYAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMBILLY, ERNAKULAM. MS.K.R.DEEPA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.3340 of 2010 (N) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 2nd day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T Challenge raised in the writ petition is against Ext.P3, a decision taken by the 6th respondent Panchayat granting permission to the party respondents to construct a road through property which allegedly is a wet land. 2. In my view, if the petitioner is aggrieved by such a decision, the remedy available to the petitioner is to approach the appellate authority, which has not been done. Therefore, I decline to entertain the writ petition bye-passing the statutory remedies. This writ petition is, therefore, disposed of leaving it open to the petitioner to seek appellate remedies against the impugned order. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg