IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN MONDAY, THE 2ND NOVEMBER 2009 / 11TH KARTHIKA 1931 WP(C).No. 4966 of 2009(N) ------------------------------------ PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. AIRLIFT FREIGHT FORWARDS (P) LTD., REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, V.K. VINAYAKUMAR, AIRLIFT ARCADE, NEAR RAILWAY OVER BRIDGE, NEDUMBASSERY. 2. NEDUMBASSERY TOWERS, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGER, M.A. ISMAIL. BY ADVS. MR.T.R.RAJAN, MR.V.V.SADANANDAN. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE NEDUMBASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KARIYAD, MEKKAD P.O. PIN 683 589, 2. THE SECRETARY, THE NEDUMBASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KARIYAD, MEKKAD P.O., PIN 683 589. 3. MRS. MARY DANIEL, W/O. DANIEL, KALAPURAKKAL ALIAS AREEKAL HOUSE, NEAR ELECTRICITY OFFICE, ATHANI. R1 & R2 BY ADVS. MR.ANOOP ELIAS, MR.GEORGE SEBASTIAN, R3 BY ADVS. MR.M.C.ANTONY, MR.WILSON URMESE. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 02/11/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.4966/2009-N: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE ADVERTISEMENT TAX BYLAWS OF THE NEDUMBASSERY GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 13/01/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE P.1. BEFORE THE P.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. NIL. SUBMITTED BY THE P.2. IN JANUARY, 2009 BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.4: PHOTOGRAPHS 4 IN NUMBER OF THE GIGANTIC HOARDING PUT UP BY THE R.3. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R1.A: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 28/04/2006 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT TO THE R.3. EXT.R1.R1.B: COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO. PR.NO.19 DTD. 18/12/2008. EXT.R3.A: COPY OF THE LICENCE ISSUED BY THE R.2. DTD. 22/01/2008. EXT.R3.B: PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE HOARDING ERRECTED IN THE PROPERTY OF THE R.3. EXT.R3.B.(1): SITE PLAN OF THE PROPERTY/HOARDING. EXT.R3.C: COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED TO THE R.2. DTD. 29/03/2008. EXT.R3.D: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 28/04/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.R3.E: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 03/05/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE R.3. EXT.R3.F: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 16/02/2009 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.R3.G: COPY OF THE OBJECTION DTD. 25/02/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE R3.. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.4966 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 2nd day of November, 2009 JUDGMENT 1.From Athani in NH 47, a road branches off to the Cochin International Air Port at Nedumbassery. That is named VIP road. The issue in hand relates to allegation by two persons who have some activities on a piece of land adjoining that road. They contend that hoardings put up by the third respondent adversely affect their business interest, view of the building belonging to them and also free movement of air and light. They also state that the hoardings are in a dangerous condition. The VIP road ought to be dealt with by some informed persons because of the importance of the road. It is in this context that the panchayat, which has granted permission to put up the hoardings, stands accused of dereliction of duty. WPC.4966/09. 2 2.The panchayat is on record stating that it had ordered the third respondent to remove the hoardings which are, according to the panchayat, in a dangerous condition. It has shown on record that the panchayat committee had rejected the third respondent's appeal in December, 2008. Though the third respondent takes the stand that the said order/resolution was not communicated to her, the fact of the matter remains that the said hoardings will stand. In the aforesaid situation, I find that the petitioners have made a strong case that the order of the panchayat should be given effect to. However, the third respondent, if not served with the decision of the panchayat, cannot be deprived of opportunity to challenge the said decision before the competent authority. Taking into consideration the counter affidavit of the first respondent panchayat, filed on 14.8.2009 also, it is ordered that the enforcement of the decision of the panchayat would stand deferred for a period of one month to enable the third respondent to seek relief against that decision in accordance WPC.4966/09. 3 with the statutory provisions. The panchayat shall enforce such decision unless there is any order restraining its enforcement on the expiry of one month from now. The writ petition is ordered accordingly, leaving open all other issues on merits. The third respondent will be issued authenticated copies of Ext.R1(a) and R1(b) by respondents 1 and 2. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.3/11.