ANDREWS KATTIKKANA,S/O.ANDREWS Vs. DEPUTY TAHSILDAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER was the Chairman of a Committee constituted by the second respondent for construction of 8 houses in the Kakkayam Adivasi Colony. For that purpose, he entered into an agreement dated 09.08.2001 with the second respondent and received advances also. The case of the petitioner is that on account of the breach committed by the respondents, the work in question could not be completed. Finally, the Panchayath issued Ext.P3 notice to him saying that he had received an excess payment of Rs.96,600.00 and that with interest at 18% thereon, he should repay Rs.1,74,846.00. On receipt of the notice, the petitioner disputed the breach alleged against him and also the liability itself by filing Ext.P4 reply. The Panchayath thereafter, initiated Revenue Recovery action against the petitioner as per Exts.P5 and 6. It is on account of the above, the writ petition was filed.

(2.) I heard the counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) THE Panchayath has not so far filed any counter affidavit in this writ petition.