The main legal point established in the judgment is that the Panchayat has the legal right to approach the court under Art.226 of the Constitution in respect of any action or order taken by the Government affecting the Panchayat. Additionally, the judgment emphasizes the requirement for statutory powers to be exercised fairly and reasonably, with reasons stated for the orders issued.

Thomas, ag. C. J.

This writ appeal is by Karunagappally Grama Panchayat. Appellant filed the original petition under Art.226 of the Constitution challenging an order passed by the Government containing a direction that the Panchayat should permit certain persons to carry on construction of a multistoreyed building. Learned Single Judge, while dismissing the original petition, has observed that "Panchayat has to obey the order-passed by the State Government, and the Panchayat cannot be the petitioner aggrieved". Learned single judge has referred to another judgment rendered by himself in which such a view has been taken.

2. Facts are the following: Construction of a multi-storeyed building on the side of National Highway was in progress. Appellant panchayat (within whose territorial limits the land concerned is situate) took the view that the construction is in violation of the rule insisting on providing a set back area as enjoined by S.220 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short'the Act'). The Panchayat Committee adopted a resolution empowering its Secretary to take necessary steps for stopping further construction of the building. The Secretary then ordered stoppage of further construction of the building and directed the respondents to demolish the already constructed portion. Affected respondents thereupon approached the Government with a petition (Ext. P1) requesting to lift the order passed by the Panchayat Secretary. Government passed Ext. P3 order withdrawing the interdict of the Panchayat and directed the Panchayat to give permission to the respondents to complete the construction in accordance with the suggestions made by the Chief Town Planner. It is Ext. P3 order which the Panchayat has challenged under Art.226 of the Constitution.

3. Learned single judge, after pointing out that Panchayat is incompetent to file the original petition under Art.226 as the Panchayat has to obey the orders passed by the Government, further observed that as the construction of the building is in progress, it is not just and proper to exercise the extra-ordinary powers of the High Court.

4. In Karur Panchayat v. State 1996(1) KLT 112 = (1995(2) KLJ 742) learned single judge has held that so long as Panchayat has to function in accordance with the provisions of the Act, it has to decide as a quasi-judicial authority and hence "its role could not be one that can be understood to be a role of adversary in the system 'where there is a question of resin the sense of a normal litigation as is understood". It was based on the said decision that the original petition was held to be not maintainable at the instance of the Panchayat.

5. The basic question which we have to decide now is whether a Panchayat has a legal right to approach the court under Art.226 of the Constitution in respect of any action or order taken by the Government affecting the Panchayat.

6. If a Panchayat has a legal right to sue, then its corollary is that it can mention an action under Art.226 of the Constitution. The legal character of a Panchayat is very much analogous to that of a Municipality or such other local body. In the case of a municipality, the position seems to be settled that it can sue or be sued. (Vide Allahabad Municipality v. J.B. Works, AIR 1957 All. 244, Gauhati Municipal Board v. Stale AIR 1966 Assam 120). The right of a company registered under the Companies Act for suing another and also for moving under Art.226 has been recognised by the Apex Court in D. C. & G. M, Co. Ltd. v. Union of India (AIR 1983 SCC 937). It may be that an officer of a Company or local body is incompetent to challenge an order passed by any authority superior to the local body through a suit or writ petition. He-has to abide by the order. But that principle cannot be imported to the situation where the juristic person itself becomes the aggrieved party.

7. In this context, we refer to S.5 of the Act which says "every Panchayat shall

be a body corporate by the name