IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.T.RAVIKUMAR WEDNESDAY, THE 19TH JANUARY 2011 / 29TH POUSHA 1932 WP(C).No. 1809 of 2011(A) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. C.ABDUL LATHIF, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.KUNJAHAMED, CHALUMMATIL HOUSE, MURINGOOR P.O., KOTTAMURI, TRISSUR DISTRICT. 2. KUNJAHAMMED KUTTY, THEYYAMBATTIL HOUSE, KOTTAMURI, MURINGOOR P.O. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.ABDUL RASHEED SRI.K.A.SHAMSUDEEN SMT.BHAMA G. NAIR SRI.V.K.MEETHIANKUNJU SRI.N.M.SIYAD RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. KORATTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KORATTY, TRICHUR DIST. REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PIN-680 308. 2. THE SECRETARY, KORATTY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KORATTY, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 308. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/01/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: C.T.RAVIKUMAR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P(C)No.1809 of 2011 ---------------------------------------- Dated 19th January, 2011 JUDGMENT The petitioners, owners in possession of 11 cents of land comprised in Survey No.176 of Koratty Village, have started scrap business in the said property after obtaining Ext.P1 licence. According to the petitioners, even at the time of purchase of the aforementioned property a building bearing No.8/415 and a shed were there in the property. Subsequent to the purchase, about 5½ cents of land was acquired for the widening of National Highway and a portion of the said building was demolished for the said purpose. The petitioners had effected repair of the remaining portion and after necessary inspection a new building number was assigned as Building No.I/341 by the Panchayat. Later, the petitioners were issued with Ext.P2 notice purported to be under section 235W(1) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act (for short `the Act'). As per Ext.P2, the petitioners were directed to stop the construction and also demolish the shed annexed to the building bearing No.I/341, alleging unauthorised construction. Later, the petitioners were issued with Ext.P6 notice. As per the same, the petitioners were informed that licence would not be granted to the WP(C).No.1809/2011 2 petitioners for running the aforesaid business in the building bearing No.I/341 on the ground that the said building was constructed violating the Building Rules and without obtaining the requisite permission from the Panchayat. 2. As against Ext.P6, whereby the petitioners were declined the licence to run the business in the aforesaid building the petitioners have preferred Ext.P9 appeal under section 276 of the Act. The said appeal is still pending before the second respondent. Evidently, Ext.P2 was only a provisional notice. Pursuant to the receipt of Ext.P2 notice the petitioners have preferred Ext.P7 before the second respondent. It is submitted that both Exts.P7 and P9 are still pending before the second respondent. At the same time, ignoring the pendency of Exts.P7 and P9, the respondents are taking coercive steps to demolish the building and shed in question. It is in the said circumstances that this writ petition has been filed. In view of the order I propose to pass in this writ petition ,I do not think it necessary to issue notice to the respondents. The contention of the petitioners is that on being aggrieved by Exts.P2 and P6 they have preferred Exts.P7 and P9 respectively to redress the grievances against Exts.P2 and P6. Both Exts.P7 and P9 are pending before the second respondent. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is WP(C).No.1809/2011 3 disposed of with a direction to the second respondent to consider and pass final orders on Ext.P7. Considering the fact that the competent authority to consider Ext.P9 is the committee of the first respondent, the second respondent is directed to place Ext.P9 appeal before the committee of the first respondent for consideration, in accordance with law, within a period of 10 days from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On receipt of Ext.P9 appeal, the committee of the first respondent shall consider and pass orders on the same, in accordance with law, expeditiously, at any rate within a period of one month thereafter. Till such time, any decision pursuant to Ext.P2 shall not be implemented. C.T.RAVIKUMAR Judge TKS