IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR FRIDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2010 / 14TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 10998 of 2010(Y) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- M.O.JOSEPH, S/O.OUSEPH, AGED 62, MOORKATTIL, PALLICHAMBAYIL ROAD, PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN-25. BY ADVS. SRI.K.C.CHARLES, SRI.M.POLY MATHAI, SRI.P.CHELLAPPAN, SRI.VIMAL K.CHARLES, SMT.A.T.RENJU. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, COCHIN-11. 2. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, CORPORATION OF COCHIN, EDAPPALLY ZONAL OFFICE, EDAPPALLY. 3. OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. J.ASOKAN, 'UTHRAM', CHAMMANIKODATH ROAD, SAMASKARA JUNCTION, PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN-25. 5. BAJI K.VARGHESE, KARANIKULAM HOUSE, CHAMMANIKODATH ROAD, SAMASKARA JUNCTION, PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN-25. 6. K.V.VENUGOPAL, CHITHIRA, 32/913A, CHAMMANIKODATH ROAD, SAMASKARA JUNCTION, PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN-25. 7. P.S.HARI PAI, PISHARATH, 32/913A, CHAMMANIKODATH ROAD, SAMASKARA JUNCTION, PALARIVATTOM, COCHIN-25. R1 & R2 BY SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS,SC,COCHIN COPN., R4 TO R7 BY ADV. SRI.K.S.AJAYAGHOSH. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.10998/2010-Y: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE DECLARATION FOR SURRENDER DTD. 05/08/2004 EXECUTED BY THE PETITONER AND HIS WIFE IN FAVOUR OF THE R.1. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 24/02/2010 ISSUED BY THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 22/01/2010 ISSUED BY THE OMBUDSMAN. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DTD. 25/03/2010. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE REPLY DTD. 22/03/2010 ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.2. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 18/11/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE R.2. BEFORE THE R.3. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R4.1: COPY OF THE ORDER NO. G.O.(RT).NO.827/2004/LSGD, TVM, DT. 27/02/2004 ISSUED BY ADDL. SECRETARY TO GOVT., LOCAL SELF GOVT. (M) DEPARTMENT, GOVT. OF KERALA. EXT.R4.2: COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FACTS REPORT DTD. 17/03/2010 PREPARED BY ASST. ENGINEER, CORPORATION OF COCHIN. EXT.R4.3(A): COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PREVIOUS OBSTRUCTION. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.10998 of 2010 --------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 4th DAY OF JUNE, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner has approached this Court challenging Exhibits P2 and P3. Exhibit P2 is the copy of the notice issued by the Corporation to re-build the central portion of the gate which causes inconvenience to the traffic on the bye line. Exhibit P3 is the order passed by the Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institution pursuant to which Exhibit P2 notice was issued to the petitioner. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and the learned counsel appearing for respondents 4 to 7. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that Exhibit P3 order passed by the Ombudsman is without notice to the petitioner and therefore there is violation of principles of natural justice. It is submitted that the reasons stated therein cannot be supported also. 3. The learned counsel appearing for the contesting respondents submitted that in Exhibit P4 order passed by the Ombudsman dated 25.3.2010, the petitioner is allowed to W.P.(C)No.10998/10 -2- approach the Municipal Corporation or the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions within a period of seven days. It is therefore submitted that the petitioner can avail the alternative remedy as ordered by the Ombudsman. 4. This Writ Petition was admitted on 30.3.2010 and this Court has passed an interim order which was being extended from time to time. 5. The petitioner will file an appeal before the appropriate authority within a period of 10 days. If the petitioner files an appeal against Exhibit P2 before the appropriate authority within a period of 10 days, the same will be entertained and disposed of after hearing the petitioner and contesting respondents, viz; respondents 4 to 7 within a further period of one month. Till then the interim order passed by this Court will continue. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn