IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 31ST OCTOBER 2008 / 9TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32126 of 2008(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- P.T.C.KUNHAYAMMU, S/O.KUYAMU, CHAIRMAN, ISLAMIC CULTURAL TRUST, KARINKALLATHANI P.O., THAZHEKODE, MALAPPURAM DIST. BY ADV. SRI.K.MUHAMMED SALAHUDHEEN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVT. INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY, GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THACHANATTUKARA, THACHANATTUKARA P.O., MANNARKAD TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 31/10/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.SIRI JAGAN, J. ================== W.P(C).No.32126 of 2008 ================== Dated this the 31st day of October, 2008 J U D G M E N T The petitioner challenges Ext.P13 order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, Thiruvananthapuram, whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner has been returned on the ground that column Nos.4 and 5 are not properly filled up. The petitioner has produced the appeal along with the writ petition. The petitioner has filled up column Nos.4 and 5 thus: “4. Name of the authority that issued notice/order or that took action which has been the cause of the petition and the number and date on which the action has come to notice. Secretary, Thachanattukara Grama Panchayath, Mannarkkad Taluk, Palakkad Dist. (In pursuance to the resolutions dated 27.7.07 and 11.12.07 of the Panchayath and communication dated 7.4.08 bearing No.17/08 of the Secretary) 5. The date of receipt of the notice/order which has been the cause of the petition/ date on which action came to notice. The order/resolution dated 27.7.07 was served on 20.8.07 on the appellant. The order dated 7.4.08 was served on the appellant only by 2.5.08.” w.p.c.32126/08 2 I am not satisfied that returning of the appeal on that ground is proper since the petitioner has filled up column Nos.4 and 5 properly. That being so, I quash the order returning the appeal and direct the Tribunal to consider the appeal as one properly filed. However, I make it clear that I have not considered as to whether the delay of 215 days in filing the appeal is condonable and it is for the Tribunal to decide the question of condonation of delay in accordance with the provisions of the Act and the decisions on the subject. The writ petition is disposed of as above. Sd/- sdk+ S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE ///True copy/// P.A. to Judge w.p.c.32126/08 3