High Court of KeralaWP(C)/32446/2014disposed of

Omana Sreedharan v. The Secretary

2015-02-20Honourable Mr. Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu4 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/1ST PHALGUNA, 1936 WP(C).No. 32446 of 2014 (E) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

---------------------- OMANA SREEDHARAN, W/O. SREEDHARAN, MUTHUKUNNI, KOOTTUPURA, AYILUR P.O., PALAKKAD - 678 703 BY ADVS.SRI.G.HARIHARAN SRI.PRAVEEN.H.

RESPONDENT(S):

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

1. THE SECRETARY, MELARKODE GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MELARKODE, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 678 541.

2. THE BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICER, ALATHUR BLOCK, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD - 678 541.

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD - 678 001.

R1 BY ADV. SRI.V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL) R2 & R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.JUSTIN JACOB THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: msv/

WP(C).No. 32446 of 2014 (E) --------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT-P1-TRUE COPY OF THE BPL RATION CARD BEARING NO. 1950067413 ISSUED BY THE CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICER, ALATHUR IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT-P2-TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED 13/10/2014 PASSED BY THE HONOURABLE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTION IN COMPLAINT NO.423/2014.

EXHIBIT-P3-TRUE COPY OF THE LIST OF BENEFICIARIES INCLUDING IN SERIAL NO. 182 TO 196 ALONG WITH A COMMUNICATION DATED 10/02/2014 ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.

EXHIBIT-P4-TRUE COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT PUBLISHED IN THE HINDU DAILY DATED 29/11/2014.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

----------------------------------------- NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S.TO JUDGE Msv/

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

--------------------------------------- W.P.(c) No. 32446 of 2014 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 20th day of February, 2015

JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel, as well as the learned Government Pleader for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

2. The petitioner has approached this Court ventilating her grievance that, despite her eligibility, she was not included as a beneficiary under EMS Housing Scheme announced by the Government of Kerala for the benefit of the poor people.

3. The learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent has submitted that into the criteria fixed for the EMS Housing Scheme, the petitioner could not fit herself,

W.P.(c) No. 32446 of 2014 and that now under the Indira Gandhi Awas Yojana Housing Scheme, the respondent Grama Panchayat is willing to consider the petitioner's claim.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner, on her part, has submitted that the petitioner may not have any objection, if her claim is to be considered under the new scheme, as has been submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent.

In the facts and circumstances, recording the submission of the learned Standing Counsel for the first respondent Grama Panchayat, this Court disposes of the writ petition. No order as to costs.

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU JUDGE DMR/-