Disposed

A.N.Ramachandran v. Chottanikkara Gramapanchayath

Kerala HC25 May 2012WP(C)/2341/2012

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court heard two connected writ petitions regarding alleged encroachment on a Panchayat road and the subsequent stop memo. Directing the Panchayat to reconsider the matter by analyzing the stop memo alongside objections filed by the recipients with proper notice, the court ordered a final decision within 8 weeks and dismissed the petitions.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Respondent Panchayat to consider allegations in the stop memo in light of objections filed by recipients with notice and pass final orders within 8 weeks.

A.N.Ramachandran Vs Chottanikkara Gramapanchayath — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF MAY 2012/4TH JYAISHTA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 2341 of 2012 (P)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

1. A.N.RAMACHANDRAN, AGED 43 YEARS

¶8

AGED 43 YEARS, S/O. N.K.NARAYANAN NAIR

¶9

VADAKKENAMBIATHU VEEDU, CHOTTANIKKARA P.O.

¶10

2. AMMINI RADHAKRISHANAN

¶11

AGED 48 YEARS, W/O. RADHAKRISHNAN

¶12

'SANTHASREE NILAYAM', CHOTTANIKKARA P.O.

¶13

BY ADVS.SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR

¶14

SMT.V.SHYLAJA

¶15

RESPONDENT(S):

¶16

1. CHOTTANIKKARA GRAMAPANCHAYATH

¶17

CHOTTANIKKARA P.O., PIN-682312

¶18

REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY.

¶19

2. THE SECRETARY

¶20

CHOTTANIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, CHOTTANIKKARA.

¶21

3. SURENDRAN, AGED 48 YEARS

¶22

AGED 48 YEARS, S/O. PARAMESWARAN

¶23

THADATHIL PUNTHENPURAYIL, CHOTTANIKKARA.

¶24

4. MANIKUTTAN

¶25

AGED 45 YEARS, S/O. THANKAPPAN

¶26

THADATHIL PUTHENPURAYIL, CHOTTANIKKARA.

¶27

BY ADV. SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE FOR R1 AND R2

¶28

BY ADV. SRI.P.PRIJITH

¶29

BY ADV. SRI.ANEESH JAMES

¶30

BY ADV. SRI.PAUL K.VARGHESE FOR R3-R4

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25-05-2012, ALONG WITH WPC. 3581/2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

WPC NO.2341/12

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS

¶35

EXHIBIT P1: THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 13-05-2011. EXHIBIT P2: THE TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO AND DEMOLITION ORDER.

¶36

EXHIBIT P3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE MATERIALS STOCKED IN THE ROAD FOR TARRING.

¶37

EXHIBIT P4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ILLEGAL ENCROACHMENT MADE BY THE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 INTO THE ROAD.

//True Copy//

PA to Judge

ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NOs. 2341 & 3581 OF 2012

¶42

=========================

¶43

Dated this the 25^th day of May, 2012

¶44

J U D G M E N T

¶45

The issue raised in the writ petitions are connected and therefore these cases are heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment.

¶46

In WP(C) No. 2341/12, petitioners contend that respondents 3 and 4 trespassed into the Panchayat road and had made certain constructions. It is their case that thereupon the Panchayat issued Ext.P2 stop memo and that nothing further has been done in the matter. It is therefore this writ petition has been filed.

¶47

In so far as WP(C) No. 3581/12 is concerned, that is filed by two persons including the recipient of the stop memo mentioned in WP(C) No. 2341/12 and the petitioners herein are challenging the stop memo after having filed objections to the same.

¶48

Thus, from the above facts itself, it is obvious that after the issuance of the stop memo, the recipients thereof have filed their objections and the Panchayat is yet to pass orders in the

¶49

WPC.Nos.2341 & 3581/12

¶50

:2 :

¶51

matter. Therefore, the only order that is required to be passed in these writ petitions is to direct that the respondent Panchayat shall consider the allegation in the stop memo in the light of the objections filed by the recipients with notice to them. Thereafter final orders in the matter shall be passed. This shall be done as expeditiously as possible at any rate within 8 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petitions. Writ petitions are disposed of as above.

¶52

ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE

¶53

A.N.Ramachandran v. Chottanikkara Gramapanchayath

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

A.N.Ramachandran v. Chottanikkara Gramapanchayath

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

B.Balakrishnan Vs the Palakkad Municipality

M/S. Kerala State Construction Corporation Vs State of Kerala

C.a.Ibrahim Vs the Mangalpady Grama Panchayath

Abdul Russak Vs Pathanamthitta Municipality and Another

C.K. Thankappan Vs the State of Kerala

Mary Stella Bai Vs the Chief Conservator of Forests