Kerala High Court
Ananthanarayanan vs The State Of Kerala on 9 December, 2019
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
MONDAY, THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2019 / 18TH AGRAHAYANA, 1941
WP(C).No.33399 OF 2019(Y)
PETITIONERS:
ANANTHANARAYANAN,
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O GOPALAKRISHNA PILLAI,
OTTATHENGIL HOUSE, PAYYANALLOOR,
NOORANAD, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT,
NOW RESIDING AT NANDAVANAM,
KUMBALAM SOUTH,
ERNAKULAM DISTRICT-682 506.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR)
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REP BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 001.
2 THE KARUNAGAPPALLY MUNICIPALITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
KARUNAGAPPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 518.
3 P.VENUGOPAL,
AGED 56 YEARS
S/O PARAMESWARAN PILLAI,
MARIYATHU VEEDU, MYNAGAPILLY NORTH,
KUNNATHOOR TALUK,
S.V.MARKET P.O.KARUNAGAPPALLY,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 573.
4 P.RAJAGOPAL,
AGED 73 YEARS
S/O PARAMESWARAN PILLAI,
MARIYATHU VEEDU, MYNAGAPILLY NORTH,
KUNNATHOOR TALUK,
S.V.MARKET P.O.KARUNAGAPPALLY,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 573,
NOW RESIDING AT REVATHI, PADHA SOUTH,
KARUNAGAPALLY, KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 518.
WP(C).No.33399 OF 2019(Y)
2
5 THE MUNCIPAL COUNCIL,
KARUNAGAPPLAY MUNICIPALITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN,
KARUNAGAPPALLY P.O.,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-590 518.
SC SASITH PANICKER;GP K.J.MANURAJ
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 09.12.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.33399 OF 2019(Y)
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court alleging that his Statutory Appeal, namely Ext.P4, preferred before the 5 th respondent-Municipal Council of Karunagappally Municipality, has not been yet taken up and disposed of, even though it was preferred on 15.10.2019.
2. According to the petitioner, he has raised certain valid complaints against respondents 3 and 4, but that the Secretary of the Municipality had rejected the same, thus constraining him to prefer Ext.P4 Appeal before the Municipal Council. He, therefore, prays that Ext.P4 be directed to be taken up and disposed of at the earliest.
3. Sri.Sasith Panickar-learned Standing Counsel appearing for Karunagappally Municipality, submitted that there does not appear to be any legal impediment in Ext.P4 being taken up by the 3rd respondent and disposed of in terms of law; but prays that this Court may not make any affirmative declaration on the entitlement of the petitioner to any relief and leave it to the said Authority to take a final decision thereon after hearing WP(C).No.33399 OF 2019(Y) 4 respondents 3 and 4 also.
4. Even though, I am conscious that this Court has not issued notice to respondents 3 and 4, am of the view that this Court will still be justified in disposing of this writ petition in the manner that I propose here-under, since these directions will not cause any prejudice to the said respondents.
Resultantly and without entering into the merits of any of the contentions of the rival parties, I order this writ petition and direct the 5th respondent-Municipal Council of Karunagappally Municipality to take up Ext.P4 Appeal and dispose of the same in terms of law, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner and to respondents 3 and 4, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
nak JUDGE
WP(C).No.33399 OF 2019(Y)
5
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL MEMORANDUM IN
RSA NO 890 OF 14 BEFORE THIS HON'BLE
COURT FILED DATED 20.8.14
EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DELIVERED BY
THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO 19343 OF
2019 DATED 27.8.2019
EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
SECOND RESPONDENT DATED 5.10.19
EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT DATED 15.10.19 //TRUE COPY// P.A TO JUDGE