Kerala High Court
Shajahan vs Perinadu Grama Panchayath on 9 June, 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/4TH AGRAHAYANA, 1935
WP(C).No. 28756 of 2013 (T)
----------------------------
PETITIONER:
--------------
SHAJAHAN,
S/O ABOOBAKER, SHAN MANSIL, EDAVATTOM CHERRY
PERINADU VILLAGE, VELLIMON P.O., KOLLAM TALUK
BY ADV. SRI.PRAMOD KOCHUTHOMMEN.E.
RESPONDENTS:
----------------
1. PERINADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
CHEMMAKKADU P.O., KOLLAM - 691 603.
2. THE SECRETARY,
PERINADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHEMMAKKADU P.O
KOLLAM - 691 603.
3. DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER (WORKS)
SOUTHERN RAILWAY,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM REGION
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
R3 BY SRI. SUNIL NATH,SC, RAILWAYS
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
25-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 28756 of 2013 (T)
----------------------------
APPENDIX
PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS
-----------------------
EXHIBIT P1 : TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED NO.3234/2008 DATED
09.06.2008
EXHIBIT P2 : PHOTOSTAT DISCLOSING NATURE OF CONSTRUCTION EFECTED BY
THE PETITIONER IN HIS SMALL PLOT
EXHIBIT P3 : TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN
EXHIBIT P3(A) : TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN
EXHIBIT P4 : TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 14.06.2012
EXHIBIT P5 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT
DATED 26.09.2012
EXHIBIT P6 : TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE
2ND RESPONDENT DT. 11.10.2012
EXHIBIT P7 : TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL
SELF GOVERNMENT DT. 20.12.2012
EXHIBIT P8 : TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 07.01.2013
EXHIBIT P9 : TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO
THE PETITIONER DATED 30.09.2013
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS NIL
------------------------
JJ /TRUE COPY/
P.S.TO JUDGE
K. SURENDRA MOHAN,J
-------------------------------
W.P(C) NO.28756 OF 2013
----------------------------------
Dated this the 25th November, 2013.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has filed this writ petition challening Ext.P9 proceedings of the first respondent Panchayat by which an application for regularisation submitted by him has been rejected. According to the petitioner, the said order is unsustainable and liable to be set aside.
2. Adv. Sunil Nath appears for the third respondent.
3. I notice that the petitioner has a statutory remedy by way of appeal provided under Rule 151 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011 against Ext.P9. Since the petitioner has not exhausted the said effective alternative remedy available, I am not satisfied that this writ petition requires to be admitted.
This writ petition is therefore dismissed but without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to pursue his statutory remedy available in law.
Sd/-
K. SURENDRA MOHAN
Judge
jj /True copy/
WPC 28756/2013 2