← Library
High Court of KeralaWP(C)/4620/2015disposed of

Rajendran v. The Director Of Panchayath, Thiruvananthapuram

2015-02-244 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI TUESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/5TH PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 4620 of 2015 (B) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

------------------ RAJENDRAN, AGED 66 YEARS S/O. KUNJU, 'SWATHY', AYAMKONAM THOTTAKKADU P.O., KALLAMBALAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

BY ADV. SRI.P.M.HABEEB RESPONDENTS:

-----------------------

1. THE DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM PIN-695024.

2. THE KARAVARAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY, THOTTAKADU KARAVARAM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695605.

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

R1 & 3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.K.SHERIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

PJ

WP(C).No. 4620 of 2015 (B) -------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DATED 10-07-2014. EXHIBIT P2HOTOCOPY OF THE PETITION DATED 21-01-2015. EXHIBIT P3ACKNOWLEDGMENT CARD.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS --------------------------------------- NIL.

/ TRUE COPY / P.S. TO JUDGE PJ

A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.

-------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 4620 of 2015 -------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th day of February, 2015

J U D G M E N T

The petitioner is the owner in possession of a property in Re.Sy.No.8/9 of Karavaram Village. He alleges that his property was subjected to aggression by the 2nd respondent panchayath on its eastern side and he made a complaint on 23.10.2001 regarding the said aggression to the District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram. As evidenced by Ext.P2, the petitioner has submitted a representation before the 1st respondent. The petitioner has come up before this Court for a direction to respondents 1 and 3 to take action on Ext.P2 representation submitted by him.

2.

Heard both sides.

3.

As the prayer in this writ petition is only for a direction to respondents 1 and 3 to take action on Ext.P2 representation, this Court is of the view that the writ

W.P.(C) No. 4620 of 2015 ..2..

petition can be disposed of without issuing notice to the 2nd respondent.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing respondents 1 and 3 to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 after affording the petitioner as well as the 2nd respondent an opportunity of being heard. This exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI JUDGE bka/-