IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 21ST JANUARY 2010 / 1ST MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2060 of 2010(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ JOJI C.P., AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.PAULO, CHEETTIPARAMBIL, KOODALAPPADU, KOOVAPPADY, KUNNATHUNADU, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.MATHEW ABRAHAM RESPONDENT(S): -------------------- 1. OKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY OKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH OFFICE, OKKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM. 2. PRESIDENT, OKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OFFICE OF THE OKKAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, OKKAL P.O., ERNAKULAM. 3. WIRELESS TT INFO SERVICES LIMITED, J & CO.CHAMBERS, MANIMALA ROAD, EDAPPALLY, COCHIN-24, REPRESENTED BY ITS DULY CONSTITUTED POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, THE MANAGER, SRI.SUDEVAN. 4. THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTION, TRIVANDRUM. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 21/01/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 2060 OF 2010 (F) ===================== Dated this the 21st day of January, 2010 J U D G M E N T Ext.P1 is a building permit granted by the respondent Panchayat enabling the 3rd respondent to install a telecommunication tower. Petitioner objected to Ext.P1 by filing Ext.P2, and at his instance, Ext.P3 stop memo was issued by the Panchayat. That was challenged before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. The Tribunal by Ext.P4 order set aside Ext.P3. True, the petitioner has a case that the Panchayat helped the 3rd respondent by remaining ex parte before the Tribunal. 2. However, after Extx.P4 order was rendered, petitioner filed Ext.P5 complaint before the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions. That proceedings are pending. During the pendency of this proceedings, petitioner also moved the Sub Court, Perumbavoor by filing OS 220/09 seeking injunction against the 3rd respondent. That proceedings is also pending. 3. It is during the pendency of both the aforesaid proceedings that this writ petition is filed praying to set aside Ext.P1 building permit. This relief cannot be granted in this WPC 2060/10 :2 : petition primarily for the reason that when the Panchayat itself stopped the work pursuant to Ext.P1 by issuing Ext.P3 stop memo, that has been interfered with by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions in Ext.P4. This order has become final. 4. That apart, petitioner has already moved the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions as also the Civil Court where he has already ventilated his grievances, and therefore, it is up to the petitioner to prosecute those proceedings and take those proceedings to its logical conclusions. The parallel proceedings instituted by this writ petition cannot be entertained. Writ petition fails and is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp