IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 6192 of 2010(Y) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.CHANDRAN AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.N.K.KANNAN, RESIDING AT KONDODI HOUSE,KARINTHALAM PO NEELESWARAM VIA, KASARAGOD. BY ADV. SRI.SANTHEEP ANKARATH MR.V.C.MADHAVANKUTTY RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, KASARAGOD. 3. DISTRICT PLANNING OFFICER OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT PLANNING OFFICER KASARAGOD. 4. KINANOOR KARINTHALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY KOITHATTA, KARINTHALAM P.O.,KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 5. K.V. KESAVAN,KAYANI,WARD NO.XIV, KINALOOR KARINTHALAM PANCHAYATH, KARINTHALAM P.O.,KASARAGOD DISTRICT. 6. RAMAN, KOOLOTH VALAPPIL HOUSE VELOOR,KARINTHALAM P.O.,KASARAGOD DISTRICT. MS.K.R.DEEPA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.6192 of 2010 (Y) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 25th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner is aggrieved by the inclusion of certain persons in Ext.P1 list prepared by the Panchayat for the benefit of EMS Housing Project. 2. According to the petitioner, several persons who are ineligible for the benefit of the Scheme have been included in Ext.P1 list. It is stated that he has made Ext.P2 complaint to the 2nd respondent pointing out the aforesaid illegality in Ext.P1, and that the 2nd respondent Panchayat forwarded the complaint to the 3rd respondent before whom the list is pending for final approval. 3. If as stated by the petitioner, any illegality in Ext.P1 has been pointed out, necessarily, the 3rd respondent before whom such complaint is pending, has to consider the complaint also, before final approval is granted to the list. Having regard to the case of the petitioner that Ext.P2 is pending before the 3rd respondent, it is directed that the 3rd respondent shall consider Ext.P2 complaint WP(C) No.6192/2010 -2- while Ext.P1 is considered for final approval. The petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of this writ petition before the 3rd respondent for compliance. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg