IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE THURSDAY, THE 14TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 25TH MAGHA 1929 WP(C).No. 5278 of 2008(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ THANKACHAN AGED 62 YEARS, S/O K.SAMUEL THUNDIL BINOY VILLA MANGARAM MURI PANDALAM BY ADV. SRI. K.SHAJ SRI.B.BALRAJ SRI.SAJJU.S RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVT. INSTITUTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REP. BY ITS SECRETARY 2. THE SECRETARY, PANDALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH 3. M.FATHIMA BEEVI, THENGUMTHARAYIL VEEDU MANGARAM MURI, PANDALAM P.O. BY ADV.SRI.SIBY MATHEW, SC FOR R2 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No. 5278 OF 2008 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 14th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Sri.K.Shaj, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Ext.P6 order is passed by the learned Ombudsman on the basis of an order which was never passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. This submission is not correct since copy of the complaint-Ext.P4 produced along with the writ petition will show that there was an order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer and a copy of that order had been annexed along with Ext.P4. Petitioner does not dispute the fact that he received notice from Ombudsman, but according to him, he could not appear before the Ombudsman and resist the prayers in the complaint. If that be the fact, it is open to the petitioner to move the Ombudsman seeking review of Ext.P6. Giving the petitioner that liberty, this writ petition is disposed of declining the prayers. Considering the above direction, implementation of Ext.P6 by the Panchayat is kept in abeyance for a period of three weeks from today. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv.