High Court of KeralaWP(C)/35265/2014disposed of

Pallichal Grama Panchayath v. State Of Kerala

2015-02-09Honourable Mr. Justice Dama Seshadri Naidu5 pages

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

PRESENT:

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/20TH MAGHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 35265 of 2014 (G) --------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S):

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

1. PALLICHAL GRAMA PANCHAYATH, VEDIVECHAN KOVIL P.O., BALARAMAPURAM (VIA), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 501, REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT.

2. A.T.MANOJ, MEMBER, THE PALLICHAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, VEDIVECHAN KOVIL P.O., BALARAMAPURAM (VIA), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 501.

BY ADV. SRI.BIJU BALAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S):

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

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

2. THE DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF PANCHAYATH, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.C.K.SHERIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: msv/

WP(C).No. 35265 of 2014 (G) ---------------------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXT. P1 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE GO (ORD.) NO.3073/2014/LSGD, DTD.25.11.2014 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXT. P2 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE STATE PERFORMANCE AUDIT OFFICER.

EXT. P3 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RESOLUTION NO.V (53), DTD.8.11.2013 OF THE 1ST PETITIONER.

EXT. P4 : PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD.1.12.2014 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MINISTER FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER.

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS:

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

DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, J.

---------------------------------- W.P. (C) No. 35265 of 2014 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 9th day of February, 2015.

JUDGMENT

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader, apart from perusing the record.

2. The grievance of the petitioners is that while conducting an enquiry, consequent to which Ext.P2 enquiry report was submitted, the State Performance Audit Officer did not give notice to the managing committee of the petitioner Grama Panchayath.

3. It is the singular contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners that there is a clear infraction of the principles of natural justice. He has further brought to my notice that acting on Ext.P2 enquiry report, the Government already issued Ext.P1 order recommending action against not only the Secretary of the Grama Panchayath, but also against the managing committee. Under these circumstances, the petitioners seek to interdict Ext.P1 as being an order in

W.P.(C.) No. 35265/2014 -2violation of the principles of natural justice.

4. The learned Government Pleader, on the other hand, has submitted that instead of acting on Ext.P1 order, the Government has felt it desirable to refer the matter to the learned Ombudsman, who has presently been seized of the issue. According to her, the petitioner is at liberty to make all defences available to him before the learned Ombudsman. In the facts and circumstances, having regard to the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, this Court disposes of the writ petition with liberty to the petitioner to enter their appearance and defend themselves before the learned Ombudsman by taking up all the legally available pleas, including that of the maintainability of the proceedings. sd/- DAMA SESHADRI NAIDU, JUDGE.

W.P.(C.) No. 35265/2014 -3-