IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 3RD MARCH 2008 / 13TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 2572 of 2008(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.A.JOSE, S/O. AUGUSTY, KACHAPPILLY HOUSE, VATTAPARAMBU HOUSE, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV. SRI.M.R.VENUGOPAL SHRI.P.K.ASOKAN RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE ASST. DIRECTOR OF AGRICULTURE, NEDUMBASSERY, ERNAKULAM. 2. THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, PARAKKADAVU, P.O.KARUMASSERY, ERNAKULAM-683 579. 3. THE SECRETARY, PARAKADAVU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KURUMASSERI P.O., ERNAKULAM-683 579. 4. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, AGRICULTURAL ENGINEERING OFFICE, VYTTILA. 5. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 6. THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, REVENUE RECOVERY, ALUVA. BY SHRI.MATHEW GEORGE VADAKEL, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V. GIRI, J. ------------------------------- W.P(C) No. 2572 OF 2008 ----------------------------------- Dated this the 3rd day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner is aggrieved by the notice under the Revenue Recovery, Ext.P11, seeking recovery of amounts allegedly due to the Agricultural Department, from the beneficiary committee who were entrusted with the work of widening, deepening and side protection of Kannankuzhisery-Karippassery Thodu at Karippassery padasekharam in Parakadavu Grama Panchayat. According to the petitioner, he was only a convener of the beneficiary committee and he cannot be personally held responsible for the amount allegedly sought to be recovered on the basis of the valuation of work. Counsel for the petitioner makes reference in this regard to Ext.P6, a letter written by the agricultural officer to Assistant Director of Agriculture, Nedumangadu. The Revenue Recovery proceedings seems to have been initiated as a consequence of Ext.P12 resolution taken by the Parakkadavu Grama Panchayat as resolution No.19 dt.18.8.07. In other words, the Panchayat seems to be the requisitioning WPC No. 2572 OF 2008 2 authority for the action under the Revenue Recovery Act. If the petitioner is therefore aggrieved by the decision of the Panchayat, it is open to him to take appropriate steps in relation to Ext.P12. In the result, the Writ Petition is disposed of permitting the petitioner to take appropriate steps in relation to Ext.P12 resolution of the Panchayat, either by way of a representation before the Government under Section 191 of the Panchayat Raj Act or, if permissible, by way of appeal before the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions. If either of these remedies is availed within a period of one month from today, it shall be treated as within time and the competent authority will consider and pass appropriate orders. Enforcement of Ext.P11 shall be kept in abeyance for a period of two months from today to enable the petitioner to avail the above mentioned remedy. Other contentions raised by the petitioner are left open. V. GIRI, JUDGE ttb WPC No. 2572 OF 2008 3 WPC No. 2572 OF 2008 4