IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH FEBRUARY 2008 / 1ST PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 35790 of 2007(I) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ K.M.SARASWATHI, AGED 67 YEARS, W/O.PRABHAKARAN, KALATHIL HOUSE, PARAMBITHARA CROSS ROAD, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, COCHIN -15. BY ADV. SRI.SREELAL N.WARRIER RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, PARK AVENUE, ERNAKULAM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, PARK AVENUE, ERNAKULAM 682011. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, ERNAKULAM VILLAGE, PARK AVENUE, ERNAKULAM. 4. GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, KADAVANTHRA, COCHIN-682020, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. TALUK SURVEYOR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM. 6. THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL AUTHORITIES, TRIVANDRUM. ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT 7. K.V.ANTONY, KIZHAVANA VEEDU PARAMBITHARA ROAD, PANAMPILLY NAGAR KANAYANNOOR, ERNAKULAM Additional respondent suo motu impleaded vide order dated 03/12/207 BY ADV. SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, SC,GCDA SRI.K.ANAND, SC, COCHIN CORPN. SRI.ALOSIOUS GILBERT GOVT. PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20/02/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(c).No.35790 OF 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 20th day of February, 2008 JUDGMENT Heard Sri.Sreelal Warriar, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.K.Anand, learned counsel for the Corporation. Sri.Sreelal would assail Ext.P9 and submit that Ext.P9 is not preceded by a notice and that the Assistant Executive Engineer is not competent to issue an order in the nature of Ext.P9. Learned standing counsel submits that Ext.P9 is issued on the basis of the directions given by the Ombudsman, to which the petitioner is a party. All the above submissions are appealing. At the same time, in view of the undisputed position that the petitioner has a remedy by way of appeal against Ext.P9 before the Council, I am not inclined to go into the issue. I relegate the petitioner to his remedy of appeal to the Council and dispose of the writ petition accordingly. If the Council of the Corporation receives an appeal against Ext.P9 from the petitioner within three weeks from today, the Council will entertain that appeal and dispose of the same after hearing WPC.No.35790/07 2 the petitioner at the earliest and at any rate within six weeks of petitioner filing the appeal. Considering the circumstances of the case, there will be a further direction that Ext.P9 will not be implemented till such time as the prospective appeal is heard and disposed of by the Council. PIUS.C.KURIAKOSE JUDGE sv. WPC.No.35790/07 2