IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 1ST JANUARY 2008 / 11TH POUSHA 1929 OP.No. 35665 of 2001(U) ----------------------- PETITIONER: -------------------- P.A.SHAJAHAN, S/O.P.M.ABDUL KAREEM RAWTHER, KOLLAMPARAMBIL HOUSE, PERUMPANACHY P.O., THEMKANNA, CHENGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.T.H.ABDUL AZEEZ SRI.P.HMOHAMMED BASHEER RAWTHER RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. MADAPPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT OFFICE, MAMOOD P.O., CHENGANACHERRY. 2. THE SECRETARY, MADAPPALLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, PANCHAYAT OFFICE, MAMOOD P.O., CHENGANACHERRY. BY ADV. SRI.LAL GEORGE, SC, PANCHAYATS SRI.R.PRAVEEN THIS ORIGINAL PETITION HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss O.P.NO.35665/2001 U ORDER ON C.M.P.NO.58265/2001 IN O.P.NO.35665/2001 U DISMISSED 1/01/2008 SD/- PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.A4-1284/01 DTD. 17/11/2001 ISSUED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.P2: COPY OF APPEAL PETITION DTD. 20/11/2001 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DTD. 20/11/2001 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. /TRUE COPY/ P.A.TO JUDGE Kss PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- O.P. NO. 35665 of 2001 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 1st day of January , 2008 JUDGMENT Under challenge in this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution is Ext.P1 notice issued by the respondent Panchayat directing the petitioner to demolish a building constructed by him by the side of the Kanjiramuttu- Karikandam road within the area of the Madappally Grama Panchayat. The road undoubtedly is a public road for the purpose of Section 2(xxxv) of the Panchayat Raj Act. But the question is whether the said road qualifies as a notified public road for the purpose of Section 220b of the Act. 2. I do not propose to decide the question finally. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P2 appeal against Ext.P1 before the council of the Panchayat. I dispose of the writ petition directing the Panchayat to take up Ext.P2 appeal, hear the petitioner and dispose of Ext.P2 in accordance with law. While taking decision on Ext.P2, the Panchayat shall give due regard to the judgment of this court in Thomas Paul v. State of Kerala ( 2007 (1) KLT 267) and any other judicial precedents of binding nature. The learned counsel for the Panchayat further submits that there is likelihood of the appeal O.P. No.35665/2001 2 having been disposed of by the Panchayat already. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that no orders passed on the appeal have been communicated to the petitioner. If order is already passed, the Panchayat shall communicate the order to the petitioner. Till such time Ext.P2 is disposed of as directed above or orders on Ext.P2 is communicated to the petitioner, the interim direction issued by this court will continue. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. dpk O.P. No.35665/2001 3 PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- O.P. NO. 35665 of 2001 ------------------------------ JUDGMENT 1ST JANUARY 2008