THANKAMMA Vs. EZHUMATTUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ext. P1 order issued by the Secretary, Ezhumattoor Grama Panchayat dated 23.1.2001 is under challenge. By Ext. P1, the Secretary of the Panchayat had directed the petitioner to remove some trees, which, on his enquiries, posed a threat to the residence of one K. G. Thomas, the 4th respondent herein. A dead line of seven days had been set for compliance.

(2.) The petitioner has filed his Original Petition inter alia contending that the Secretary had no jurisdiction to issue such proceedings and the peremptory direction is, therefore, illegal. He further refers to S.238 of the Panchayat Raj Act and stresses on the wording of the Section that it was the Grama Panchayat who was competent to issue notice to the owner of any offending trees and moot proposal for cutting and removing or dealing with them. According to him, as the Panchayat had not taken a decision, the Secretary was incompetent to issue such an order, and it deserves to be set aside, being a nullity.

(3.) Sri. Siby Mathew, counsel appearing for the Grama Panchayat as also Sri. M. V. S. Namboothiri, the counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submitted that the objections made by the petitioner was without any basis and the "Panchayat" referred to in the Section took note of the Executive Officer and the Secretary was authorised and competent to issue an order of such a nature. The counsel appearing for the Grama Panchayat has also referred to S.238(1)(b) which shows that even without notice, in case of emergency, powers had been conferred by the Panchayat Raj Act to the Secretary concerned to issue an order for cutting and removing inconvenient tree growths.