IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 26TH MAY 2010 / 5TH JYAISHTA 1932 WP(C).No. 16076 of 2010(H) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.V.SIVADAS, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.VELAYUDHAN, KALLAMPILLIL HOUSE, KUTTAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KUTTAMANGALAM KARA, UPPUKULAM BHAGAM, OONNUKAL.P.O. BY ADV. SRI.S.DILEEP (KALLAR) RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. SOLY JOHN, AGED 40 YEARS, W/O.TOY, PARAMBEL HOUSE, KUTTAMANGALAM VILLAGE, KUTTAMANGALAM KARA, UPPUKULAM BHAGAM, OONNUKAL.P.O. 2. KAVALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, NELLIMATTAM.P.O, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE SECRETARY, KAVALANGAD GRAMA PANCHAYAT, NELLIMATTOM.P.O. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/05/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.16076/2010-H ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 26th day of May, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is the co-owner of 21/2 cents of property in Survey No.688/1 of Kuttamangalam Village. The first respondent is the owner of 11/2 cents of property in the same village which is situated in the Eastern side of the petitioner's property. 2. The petitioner happened to file a complaint before the Panchayat in the year 2008 as per Ext.P1(a) when the first respondent is alleged to have started illegal constructions in the property without complying with the Building Rules. Thereafter, the Panchayat issued a stop memo and the first respondent stopped the construction. But, later he continued to effect the construction which prompted the petitioner to file a fresh complaint as per Exts.P2(a) and, P2(b) is the copy of the receipt evidencing the acceptance of the complaint by the Panchayat. It is the case of the petitioner that the first respondent is carrying on the illegal construction. 3. The question whether the licence has been obtained by the first respondent is a matter for the Panchayat to consider. This Court is not, therefore, considering the matter on the merits of the dispute. The limited relief W.P.(C). No.16076/2010 -:2:- sought for by the petitioner is for a direction to the third respondent to consider Ext.P2(a) complaint. 4. There will be a direction to the third respondent to consider Ext.P2(a) and make due enquiries in the matter with notice to the petitioner and the first respondent and appropriate decision will be taken in the matter within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this Judgment. The petitioner will produce a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of this Judgment before the third respondent for compliance. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. Sd/- (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms \\TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE