M.M.Mathew v. State Of Kerala

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU FRIDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/17TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 34098 of 2014 (J) ----------------------------------------- PETITIONER:

M.M.MATHEW, S/O.MATHEW (RTD.HEADMASTER), AGED 60 YEARS, RESIDING AT MANAMPURATH HOUSE, MANIKKADAVU P.O., IRITTY TALUK, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS.SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN SMT.MINI.V.A.

RESPONDENTS:

1. STATE OF KERALA REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001.

2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATH, KANNUR-670002.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.K.SHERIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSIO ON 06-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

APPENDIX in WP(C).No. 34098 of 2014 (J) PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXT. P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTIFICATION PUBLISHED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXT. P2 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 26-11-2014 ALONG WITH ALL NECESSARY REQUIREMENTS.

EXT. P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 28-11-2014 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT EXT. P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 6-12-2014.

EXT. P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMI DAILY DATED 8-12-2014.

EXT. P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 26-11-2014 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE MINISTER FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL.

/TRUE COPY/ P.S. TO JUDGE

Dama Seshadri Naidu, J.

------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.34098 of 2014 J -------------------------------------------- Dated this the 6th day of February, 2015

JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2, 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. Briefly stated, the petitioner, said to be the Convenor of the Karma Samithi, which is said to have been formed for establishing a new Grama Panchayat at Manikkadavu, is a resident of the same village coming under Ulikkal Grama Panchayat. As part of the Samithi's efforts to have Ulikkal Grama Panchayat bifurcated, the petitioner and other people interested in the issue are said to have jointly submitted Exhibit P2 application to the second respondent.

WPC 34098/14

3. A perusal of the record reveals that Exhibit P2 application was submitted in terms of Exhibit P1, a notification issued by the second respondent inviting applications for formation of new Grama Panchayat. Ventilating his grievance that their Exhibit P2 application has so far not been considered, the petitioner approached this Court.

In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the respective submissions of the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader, this Court, without adverting to the merits of the matter, disposes of the writ petition with a direction to the second respondent to consider Exhibit P2 application of the petitioner in accordance with law and pass appropriate orders thereon, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Dama Seshadri Naidu, Judge tkv