IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 10TH AUGUST 2010 / 19TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 24753 of 2010(T) --------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. BENNY.K.K., AGED 36 YEARS, S/O.KURUVILA, RESIDING AT KANAMPURAM HOUSE, KARUKULAM KARA, VILANGU P.O.-683 561. 2. K.J.JOSEPH, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.OUSEPH, RESIDING AT KOYIKKARA HOUSE, KIZHAKKAMBALAM KARA, KIZHAKKAMBALAM P.O.-683 562. BY ADV. SRI.P.SATHISAN RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. KIZHAKKAMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KIZHAKKAMBALAM-683 562. 2. SECRETARY, KIZHAKKAMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KIZHAKKAMBALAM-683 562. 3. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10/08/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: tss T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.24753 OF 2010 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 10th day of August, 2010. J U D G M E N T The 1st petitioner is an elected member from Ward No.13 of the Kizhakkambalam Grama Panchayath and the 2nd petitioner is a voter from Ward No.13 of the Panchayath. The main grievance raised in the writ petition is in relation to the meeting held by the Committee of the Panchayath allegedly without sufficient notice to the petitioners and the decision taken thereon. 2. What is alleged in the writ petition is that the meeting convened on 31.07.2010 was in clear violation of the Kerala Panchayath Raj (Procedure for Panchayath Meeting) Rules 1995 specifically Rule 4. It is pointed out that there was no three clear days notice for the meeting. It is alleged in paragraph 3 of the writ petition that the agenda itself has been prepared on 27.07.2010 and the same has been given to the members on 28.07.2010 and on 29.07.2010. The notices were served only on 29.07.2010. It is also mentioned that one member from Ward W.P.(C) No.24753/2010 2 No.10 namely, M.P.Rajan has not been given any notice. Highlighting these grievances, the petitioners have approached the Deputy Director of Panchayath by filing a representation. The petitioners have also certain complaints regarding the finalisation of the list of beneficiaries for executing certain contract work. 3. Learned counsel for the Grama Panchayath submitted that the allegations are not correct. Evidently, the petitioners have to approach the Government under Section 191 of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act. 4. Going by the decision of this Court in Suresh vs. State of Kerala (2006 (1) KLT 669), the Deputy Director of Panchayath is not an authority under the relevant Rules to take any action in the matter. The petitioners will, therefore, file appropriate representations before the Government by invoking the power under Section 191 of the Act. If such a representation is filed within a period of two weeks along with a copy of this judgment, the same will be considered by the Government and appropriate orders will be passed, after hearing the petitioners and the Panchayath, within a period of one month. W.P.(C) No.24753/2010 3 Learned counsel for the petitioners prayed for a direction to the Panchayath not to implement the decisions already taken by the Panchayath. The petitioners can, while moving the Government, seek for appropriate interim orders. If a prayer for interim order is made, the same will also be considered by the Government. This writ petition is disposed of as above. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR JUDGE smp