IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD FEBRUARY 2010 / 14TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 3415 of 2010(B) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- VENGANNOOR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, VENGANNOOR P.O, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY T.RADHAKLRISHNAN,S/O.DAIVATHAN. BY ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- M.J.LIDS0N RAJ, LIN BHYAVAN, K.S.ROAD, MUTTTACKAL, KOVALAM P.O,TRIVANDRUM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J ....................... W.P.(C).3415/2010 ....................... Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. The challenge in the writ petition is against Ext.P6, an order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in O.P.No.323/2006, which was filed by the respondent herein. The Tribunal by Ext.P6, set aside the impugned proceedings with liberty to the petitioner to take fresh action in the matter. Petitioner's grievance is that the ex parte order was passed based on the adverse inference drawn by the Tribunal for the reason that despite directions, the relevant file was not produced. 2. According to the petitioner, though they had engaged a counsel, on account of an inadvertent omission on the part of the counsel, the petitioner went unrepresented which resulted in Ext.P6 order. Ordinarily in circumstances as in this case, this Court would have been tempted to interfere with Ext.P6 and give the Panchayat an opportunity to contest the matter on merits. W.P.(C).3415/10 2 However, a reading of Ext.P6 order show that the Tribunal was satisfied that the steps initiated by the Panchayat against the respondent was irregular for technical reasons and it was for that reason, the Tribunal interfered with the matter. The Panchayat is also given freedom to take fresh action in the matter. On merits, this finding cannot be faulted and if so, no prejudice is caused to the Panchayat. 3. In that view of the matter, I do not think it necessary to interfere with Ext.P6. Therefore, the writ petition is dismissed reserving liberty to the petitioner to take fresh action as ordered by the Tribunal in Ext.P6. ANTONY DOMINIC, Judge mrcs