IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KURIAN JOSEPH WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH SEPTEMBER 2008 / 2ND ASWINA 1930 WP(C).No. 14771 of 2006(H) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ AZHIKODE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, P.O. AZHIKODE, KANNUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SPECIAL GRADE SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.P.V.SURENDRANATH S RI.V.A.ABDUL JALEEL RESPONDENTS: ----------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO LOCAL SELF GOVT., SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, KANNUR. 3. TALUK SURVEYOR, TALUK OFFICE, KANNUR. 4. OMBUDSMAN, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 5. T.P. SHAHUL HAMEED, SHAHULS, VANKULATH VAYAL, AZHIKODE. SRI.M.RAMESH CHANDER FOR R5 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. NOBLE MATHEW FOR R1,2,AND R4. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 24/09/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO.14771/2006 APPENDIX PETITIONERS EXHIBITS EXT.P1:- COPY OF THE ORDER DT. 5.5.06 PASSED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P2:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT/REQUEST MADE BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF THE PANCHAYATH. EXT.3:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. 6.12.2003 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P4:- COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE PANCHAYATH TO THE TALUK SURVEYOR IN FORM NO.10 OF SURVEY MANUAL. EXT.P5:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. NIL ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P6:- COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT DT. 18.3.06. EXT.P7:- COPY OF THE AFORESAID REQUEST DT. 27.4.06 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P8:- COPY OF THE STATEMENT SUBMTITED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. /TRUE COPY/ P.A. TO JUDGE tss KURIAN JOSEPH, J. --------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.14771 OF 2006 --------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of September, 2008. J U D G M E N T Exhibit P1 order passed by the fourth respondent is under challenge. According to the petitioner-panchayath, the dispute essentially is of a civil nature. The fourth respondent, without properly understanding the factual and legal position, has issued a direction to the petitioner-panchayath to demolish the fish market under dispute on the ground that the same is constructed trespassing into the property of the fifth respondent. Apparently, the dispute does not come under Sections 271F and 271J of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act. There is an express bar also under Section 271M of the Act. 2. Therefore, Exhibit P1 is quashed without prejudice to the liberty to the fifth respondent to approach the Civil Court for redressal of his grievances. Needless to say that in the event of the fifth respondent approaching the Civil Court as above, in case there is any question of limitation, the time taken by the fifth W.P.(C) No.14771/06 2 respondent for prosecuting the matter before the fourth respondent and the period of pendency of the writ petition shall also be excluded. This writ petition is disposed of as above. KURIAN JOSEPH, JUDGE. smp W.P.(C) No.14771/06 3 KURIAN JOSEPH, J. W.P.(C) No. 14771 OF 2006 J U D G M E N T 24.09.2008