C A JOY Vs. SECRETARY, KORATTY GRAMA PANCAHYATH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in these two cases are stated to be residents on the side of a road, owned by the second respondent - Koratty Grama Panchayat, called the Vadakke Angadi Pallikulam Panchayath road. Their focal allegation in these writ petitions is that the Secretary of the second respondent - Panchayath has issued notices to them asking them to evict from certain portions of the road, on the assertion that such portions are Panchayath road, since they fall under the category of puramboke.

(2.) The petitioners say that the basis of the notice, that the extents they are presently occupying are puramboke, are not borne by records or substantiated by valid proceedings. The pleadings further reveal that against the notices issued by the Secretary of the Panchayath, the petitioners have preferred certain objections/representations before the Panchayath Committee and on the accusation that these objections/representations have not been considered, they had moved these writ petitions seeking that the action taken by the Secretary be interdicted, at least until such time as their objections/representations are decided by the Panchayath Committee.

(3.) Since the factual scenario in both these writ petitions are similar, if not identical and since the prayers sought for are also of the same nature, I deem it appropriate to dispose of both these matters by this judgment. However, for the sake of convenience, I treat W.P.(C) No.33868 of 2009 as the lead case.