IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DECEMBER 2008 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 37197 of 2008(C) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- S.D. SHIBULAL, NO. 383, 42ND CROSS, 9TH MAIN, 5TH BLOCK, JAYA NAGAR, BANGALORE - 41. BY ADV. SRI.C.E.UNNIKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. MANNANCHERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATHS, ALAPPUZHA. 4. NISSAR.C.C, S/O. ABOOBACKER, CHILAMBITHAYYIL, PONNAD.P.O, AMBALAPPUZHA. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA. SRI. V. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/12/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------------ W.P.(C)No.37197 OF 2008 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of December, 2008 JUDGMENT The petitioner is challenging Exts.P3 and P7. Ext.P7 is an interim order of the Ombudsman in a complaint pending before him directing the petitioner herein to stop construction in the petitioner's properties. Pursuant to Ext.P7, the 2nd respondent has issued Ext.P3 stop memo. It is challenging those orders the petitioner has filed this writ petition. 2. I have heard the learned counsel for the Panchayat also. I am not inclined to interfere with either orders, in so far as Ext.P7 is only an interim order in a pending matter before the Ombudsman. From Ext.P7 I see that on the date of hearing, the petitioner was not present. The petitioner submits that the petitioner could not be present for hearing because notice was issued to him in a wrong address. If that be so, the remedy of the petitioner lies in approaching the Ombudsman for a hearing for vacating the interim order on the ground that he did not W.P.(c)No.37197/08 2 receive any notice. I have no reason to apprehend that the Ombudsman will not consider such an application in accordance with law. Therefore, without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the Ombudsman for vacating the interim order, this writ petition is dismissed. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE Acd W.P.(c)No.37197/08 3