IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE FRIDAY, THE 29TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 5912 of 2008(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.K.SUBRAMANYAN, AGED 38 YEARS, S/O. KUTTAPPAN, KULAPARAMBIL, KURUMASSERY, PARAKADAVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.RAJIT SRI.RANJIT BABU RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. PARAKADAVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. THE PARAKADAVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH APPELLATE COUNCIL, PARAKADAVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY. 3. THE SECRETARY, PARAKADAVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ALUVA TALUK, ERNAKULAM. 4. C.E.THOMAS, CHAKYATH HOUSE, ARUPURAM, AYINUR P.O. BY ADV. SRI.M.P.ASHOK KUMAR ADV.SRI.S.GOPINATHAN GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No.5912 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Sri.M.P.Ashok Kumar takes notice on behalf of respondent No.4. Sri.S. Gopinathan takes notice on behalf of respondents 1 to 3. 2. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, who is aggrieved by the grant of licence in favour of the 4th respondent, with the following reliefs: “a) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing decision No.6 in Ext.P4 resolution of the 1st respondent. b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents 1 & 2 to consider and dispose of Ext.P3 appeal filed by the petitioner on merits after hearing the petitioner. c) Direct the respondents 1 to 3 to immediately issue stop memo to the 4th respondent requiring him to stop the working of the cement brick manufacturing unit pending consideration of Ext.P3 appeal. WPC.No.5912/08 2 d) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and necessary in the facts and circumstances of the case.” 3. It is seen that the Panchayat Committee has already disposed of the appeal vide item No.6 in Ext.P4. I dispose of the writ petition directing respondents 1 to 3 to communicate to the petitioner the decision of the Committee not to entertain the petitioner's appeal/rejecting the petitioner's appeal , within two weeks of petitioner making available a copy of this judgment. Once the decision is communicated to the petitioner, it is open to the petitioner to invoke his statutory remedy before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. The 4th respondent is informed that the operation and validity of the licence issued to him by the Panchayat will be subject to the outcome of the prospective appeal to be filed by the petitioner. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.5912/08 2