IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN TUESDAY, THE 9TH JUNE 2009 / 19TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 22275 of 2005(B) ----------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ THE SECRETARY, THIRUNELLY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THIRUNELLY P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT. BY ADV.MR.P.K.RAMKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THITHU, PALLIMUKKU, ARANAPPARA, THOLPETTY P.O., WAYANAD DISTRICT. 2. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT.K.R.DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/06/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 22275 OF 2005 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 9th DAY OF JUNE, 2009 JUDGMENT Service complete. Heard. The first respondent complained to the Ombudsman for Local Self Government institutions that she is not given aid for house construction, though she applied in 1998. The petitioner panchayat stated before the Ombudsman that the first respondent had not applied for any such benefit. Ombudsman took the view that the first respondent would not be telling a lie and accordingly issued directions. There is nothing on record to show that the first respondent had applied for the aid. The panchayat has also shown through its minutes, Ext.P4, that the first respondent is not included in the list of beneficiaries. It would have been proper for the petitioner panchayat to have produced such material before the Ombudsman. But it did not do so. Yet, after the lapse of nearly six years from the date of the alleged refusal, Ombudsman could not have entertained the complaint. The impugned order, has therefore, to go. WP(C)22275/2005 2 In the result, this writ petition is allowed, quashing Ext.P1. No costs. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/10/6