1. In these writ petitions, the challenge is against the preliminary and final notifications dated 5.6.2010 2.7.2010, whereby certain Village Panchayats forming the area of Block Panchayats have been excluded and added to other Block Panchayats.

2. In W.P.(C) No.21166/2010, the challenge is against the exclusion of Thalappalam Grama Panchayat from the existing Erattupetta Block Panchayat, in W.P.(C) No.21382/2010 the exclusion of Thidanadu Grama Panchayt from the existing Erattupetta Block Panchayat, is under challenge. The above two Grama Panchayats are sought to be included in Lalam Block Panchayat. W.P.(C) No.21254/2010 concerns the challenge against the delinking of Kottappady Grama Panchayat from Kothamangalam Block Panchayat and inclusion of the same in Koovappady Block Panchayat and W.P.

(C) No.21437/2010 concerns the challenge against deletion of Thirunavaya Grama Panchayat from Thirur Block Panchayat and the inclusion of the same in Kuttippuram Block Panchayat.

2. The preliminary notification issued by the Government is common to all Districts, which is produced as Ext.P1 in W.P.(C) No.21166/2010. The same is dated 5.6.2010. The notification concerns reorganisation of certain Block Panchayats in different districts. The objections of individuals, Local Self Government Institutions, etc. have been sought for, which had to be submitted within 15 days from the date of notification. The final notification is produced as Ext.P5 therein, which is dated 2.7.2010 which is also common one. The reconstitution of the Block Panchayats will be effective from 1.10.2010.

3. Heard Shri K. Ramakumar, learned Senior Counsel, Shri P.V. Baby, Shri Shaji Thomas and Shri Kaleeswaram Raj, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners, Shri C.M. Suresh Babu, learned Govt. Pleader, Shri Murali Purushothaman, learned Standing Counsel for the Election Commission and Shri K. Jaju Babu, Shri M.R. Nandakumar and Shri P. Babu Kumar, learned Counsel appearing for the respective Panchayats.

4. One of the main grounds of attack about the proposal is want of consultation and its sufficiency with the Panchayats concerned, as provided under Section 4(2) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (for short 'the Act'). Further, it is pointed out that the opportunity given to submit objections was not at all a sufficient one and none of the objections have been considered by the Government while issuing the final notification, in their correct perspective. It is also pointed out that in directing exclusion of certain Village Panchayats from the existing Block Panchayats and including them in other Block Panchayats, the Government has not adopted any rational basis and the geographical as well as other relevant criteria including lack of transport facility to reach the headquarters of the new Block Panchayats and the difficulties of the people to avail the benefits, have not at all been considered. It is also pointed out that no scientific study has been conducted by the Government in the whole exercise especially with regard to the geographical factors, the facilities available for the existing Block Panchayats and the administrative difficulties. It is also pointed out that the blatant disregard has been shown to the opinions of the respective Village Panchayats and Block Panchayats in taking such a drastic step and the objections have not been considered on its merits. It is further pointed out that the resultant actions are unreasonable, arbitrary and illegal and without any application of mind to the relevant aspects including population, geographical criteria and other important aspects.

5. Before going into the respective contentions of the parties, it is necessary to consider the provisions of the Constitution and the statutory provisions. In Part IX of the Constitution, Article 243(c) defines 'intermediate level'. It means a level between the village and district levels specified by the Governor of a State by public notification to be the inte