Disposed

K.Shaji v. Thanneermukkam Grama Panchayath

Kerala HC10 Jul 2012WP(C)/139/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This writ petition concerned a dispute over the construction of a toilet room by a third respondent near the petitioner's well. The High Court, on the same day it admitted the petition, directed the first respondent to act on the petitioner's complaint and conduct a local inspection within four weeks.

What did the court decide?

The first respondent is directed to take action on the petitioner's complaint and conduct a local inspection, if necessary, within four weeks.

K.Shaji Vs Thanneermukkam Grama Panchayath — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JULY 2012/19TH ASHADHA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 139 of 2012 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

K.SHAJI,

¶8

AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.KARUNAKARAN, KOLLAMPARAMBIL VARANAM P.O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS.SRI.G.D.PANICKER

¶10

SMT.JEENA JOSEPH

¶11

RESPONDENT(S):

¶12

THANNEERMUKKAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶13

THANNEERMUKKAM P.O.CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT

¶14

PIN - 688 555.

¶15

DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

¶16

ALAPPUZHA, PIN - 688 001.

¶17

K.R.KUTTAPPAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN ACHARY, KOLLAMPARAMBIL VARANAM P.O.CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT

¶18

PIN - 688 527.

¶19

BY ADV. SRI.J.OM PRAKASH

¶20

BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.M.MOHAMMED SHAFI BY ADV. SRI.DINESH R.SHENOY

¶21

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 10-07-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

W.P.(C).139/12

¶23

APPENDIX

¶24

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS

¶25

EXT.P-1 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 23.9.2011.

¶26

EXT.P-2 A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 16.11.2011 ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶27

/true copy/

¶28

P.A. To Judge

¶29

ANTONY DOMINIC, J

¶30

W.P.(C).139/2012

¶31

.............................................. Dated this the 10^th day of July, 2012

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the first respondent and the leaned counsel appearing for the third respondent.

¶34

According to the petitioner, the third respondent is constructing a toilet room very close to a well situated in his property comprised in Survey No.139/20 of Thanneermukkam Village. It is stated that complaining of the above, he made Exts.P1 and P2 complaints to respondents 1 and 2 and that there has not been any action on their part. It is with this allegation that this writ petition is filed.

¶35

Having heard both sides, I direct the first respondent to take action on Ext.P1 complaint made by the petitioner with notice to the parties concerned and if necessary, after conducting a local inspection.

¶36

W.P.(C).139/12

¶37

¶38

This shall be done as expeditiously as possible, at

¶39

any rate, within four weeks from today.

¶40

Writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶41

Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶42

mrcs

¶43

/true copy/ PA To Judge

K.Shaji v. Thanneermukkam Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.Shaji v. Thanneermukkam Grama Panchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Nadeera Vs Kuthanoor Grama Panchayath

Kalady Grama Panchayath Vs Ombudsman

Pushpavalli Vs the Returning Officer, Kudumbasree

Eldho Varghese Vs the Principal

Paulp.Abraham Vs Union of India

M.Shyjin Vs State of Kerala