IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH MAY 2009 / 8TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 14760 of 2009(L) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ R.JANARDHANAN PILLAI, S/O.RAMAN PILLAI, MUNDACKAL HOUSE, EZHAMKULAM MURI, EZHAMKULAM VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.P.GOPINATHAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DEPUTY DIRECTOR, PANCHAYATS, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. SECRETARY, EZHAMKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, EZHAMKULAM, ADUR TALUK. 4. R.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, S/O.RAMAN PILLAI, SREE SAILAM, EZHAMKULAM MURI, EZHAMKULAM VILLAGE, ADUR TALUK. 5. SMT.PRABHA, D/O.BALAKRISHNA PILLAI, PANCHAYAT MEMBER, SREE SAILAM, EZHAMKULAM MURI, EZHAMKULAM VILLAGE, ADUR TALUK. BY GOVT. PLEADER MR.MATHEW VADAKKEL THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 14760 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 29th DAY OF MAY,2009 JUDGMENT Government Pleader appears for first and second respondents. Notice to respondents 3 to 5 is dispensed with, preserving their right to move for review of this judgment, if aggrieved. Going by the cause title, the petitioner and the fourth respondent appear to be brothers. On query by the court, learned counsel for the petitioner affirms this. The fifth respondent is the daughter of the fourth respondent. Petitioner filed Ext.P3 complaint before the panchayat stating that the 5th respondent is constructing a building in violation of the building rules and approved plan. It is stated that the panchayat has issued a stop memo, however that fifth respondent is carrying on with the construction and this led to the filing of Ext.P7, followed by the institution of this writ petition. Without expressing anything on merits, it is directed that the third respondent will take up Ext.P7 and P3, hear the necessary parties and conclude the proceedings therein in accordance with law, at the earliest. It is clarified that WP(C) 14760/2009 2 this judgment does not express anything touching the merits of the litigation between the parties and this writ petition is ordered hoping that the petitioner and the respondents 4 and 5 will buy peace rather than carry on with the litigations. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/30/5