SREEDHARAN N. Vs. KALLUVATHUKKAL PANCHAYATH AND ORS.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned counsel for the respondents, apart from perusing the record. Since the issue lies in a narrow compass, this Court proposes to dispose of the writ petition at the admission stage itself.

(2.) Briefly stated, the petitioner, a lessee of a shop room from the first respondent Grama Panchayat, applied for renewal of the lease for the year 2014-2015. The respondent Grama Panchayat, however, refused to renew the lease and the decision is said to have been communicated through the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat as could be seen from Exhibits P1 and P3. Assailing Exhibits P1 and P3 on the ground that instead of the Secretary, the competent authority, the committee of the Grama Panchayat has taken a decision concerning the non-renewal of the lease, the petitioner filed the present writ petition.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to Sections 185 B, 236(3) and 276 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, and has contended that the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat is the primary authority to take a decision in terms of Section 236 and that his mere repetition or reproduction of the decision said to have been taken by the committee of the Grama Panchayat is nothing but an abdication of the administrative power conferred on him.