PALLICHAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT Vs. LALITHAMBIKA A

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner Panchayat is aggrieved of Ext. P1 order passed by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions, whereby the appeal preferred by the first respondent was allowed and the Secretary of the Panchayat was directed to take a decision on the application dated 20/09/2006 filed by the first respondent for permission to construct a compound wall after getting the boundary separating her property from the adjacent road fixed through the Taluk Surveyor and considering the width of the road as shown in the site plan.

(2.) THE case projected by the petitioner is that the concerned road is having a width of 8 meters, though it was having only a width of 6.10 meters way back in 2003 i.e. before the surrender of the properties lying on the side of the road by the adjacent owners for widening the road. THE first respondent became the owner of the property only on 31/08/2006 as borne by Ext. R(b) produced along with the counter-affidavit filed by the first respondent, whereby an extent of 8 cents of land comprised in Sy.No.261/1-2 was conveyed to her by her husband Kamalasanan Achari. According to the petitioner, prior to conveyance of the above property to the first respondent, Kamalasanan Achari had already surrendered the relevant portion of the property for widening the road, to have a total width of 8 metres. THE first respondent, immediately after obtaining the ownership, possession and title over the property submitted an application for getting permission for constructing the compound wall showing the width of the road only as 6.10 metres. In the meanwhile, various complaints by way of mass petitions, lawyers' notice, etc. were received by the Panchayat stating that there was a conscious attempt from the part of the first respondent to encroach into the portion of the land being utilized as road, which was sought to be intercepted. Pursuant to the said complaints, the President of the Panchayat directed to place the application filed by the first respondent before the 'Panchayat Committee, for consideration. After considering the relevant facts and figures, the Committee chose to reject the application asking the applicant to submit a revised plan and sketch showing the width of the road as '8 metres', for granting sanction to construct the compound wall.

(3.) THE first respondent has filed IA No. 10677 of 2008 seeking to accept some additional documents judgment and decree dated 11/04/2008 in OS 646 of 2006 on the file of the Prl. Munsiff's Court, Neyyattinkara), which is a case filed by some residents of the locality against Kamalasanan Achari (husband of the first respondent) and also against the first respondent seeking for permanent injunction restraining them from constructing any compound wall reducing the width of the road from 8 metres. THE Panchayat was also subsequently impleaded as the additional third respondent in the above proceedings. On conclusion of the trial, the Court, placing reliance on the report submitted by the Commissioner, dismissed the suit with costs and it has become final. Obviously, the said verdict was passed only subsequent to the proceedings pursued by the Tribunal for Local Self Government Institutions leading to Ext. P1 order.