IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR THURSDAY, THE 24TH FEBRUARY 2011 / 5TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5890 of 2011(I) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ MOIDU P., AGED 65 YEARS, S/O. MUHAMMEDKUTTY, PARAPPULLY HOUSE, PERUMPADAPPU P.O., MALAPPURAM.679 580 BY ADV. SRI.K.J.SAJI ISAAC DR.ELIZABETH VARKEY RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- PERUMPADAPPA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PERUMPADAPPA, PONNANI, MALAPPURAM-679 580, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/02/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: sts C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. ---------------------------- W.P.(C)No.5890 of 2011 ---------------------------- Dated 24th February, 2011 JUDGMENT This writ petition has been filed mainly challenging Ext.P2 order passed by the Secretary of the respondent Panchayat. Evidently, it is an order passed under section 235W(1) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act (for short `the Act'). An appeal will lie against the said order in terms of the provisions under section 276(4) of the Act. In view of the said position, the petitioner has to approach the appellate authority to redress his grievances against Ext.P2. However, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner brought to my notice that there is threat for further coercive steps in case the petitioner fails to demolish the compound wall in question within 15 days. It is submitted that in terms of the provisions under section 276 of the Act a period of 30 days is available for preparing an appeal against Ext.P2. However, the petitioner is required to demolish the compound wall even before the expiry of such statutorily prescribed period. In view of the order I propose to pass in this writ petition, I do not think it necessary to issue notice to the respondent at this stage. Obviously, Ext.P2 is an appealable order. An appeal will lie against the same in terms of section 276(4) of the Act. WP(C).No.5890/2011 2 Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to prefer an appeal against Ext.P2 this writ petition is disposed of with a further direction to the respondent to maintain status quo till 17.3.2011. Sd/- C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS // true copy // P.S to Judge