MOHAMMED KUTTY K.P. Vs. OLAVANNA GRAMA PANCHAYATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is the owner of a building that lies within the limits of the first respondent Panchayat. According to the petitioner, in the said building there are several shop rooms bearing Nos. OP -3/715A to OP -715K and those shop rooms are being occupied by the persons to whom they were let out by the petitioner for conducting business. Alleging that the said shop rooms are being used for residential purposes without being used for commercial purposes the third respondent preferred a complaint before the first respondent Panchayat. Earlier, alleging inaction on the part of respondents 1 and 2 despite the receipt of such a complaint the 3rd respondent approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No. 8968 of 2013. The petitioner herein was arrayed as third respondent in the said writ petition. That writ petition came to be disposed of at the admission stage itself by Ext.P2 judgment and therefore, the petitioner was not served with notice in the said proceedings. As per Ext.P2 judgment, this Court directed the first respondent therein/the second respondent herein viz., the Secretary of the Panchayat, to consider Exts.P2 and P3 representations, referred as such in that writ petition, and pass appropriate orders thereon within the time stipulated thereunder. Subsequently, Ext.P1 order, the impugned order in this writ petition was passed. As per the same, the petitioner was asked to evict the persons who are residing in the shop rooms and to report the matter within seven days from the date of receipt of Ext.P1. He was further cautioned with coercive steps in case of his failure to take appropriate action in tune with the directions in Ext.P1. The petitioner was asked to show cause, in case he is having any objection for implementing the directions, within 24 hours. It is in the said circumstances that the captioned writ petition has been filed. Essentially, the contention of the petitioner is that such an order was passed without issuing notice to him and without affording him an opportunity of being heard. The time granted as per Ext.P1 is too short to give a proper reply to it. When this matter came up for admission on 16.5.2014 this Court passed an interim order staying all further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P1. Upon receipt of notice the respondents entered appearance.

(2.) I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned standing counsel for respondents 1 and 2 and also the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent.