SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2001 Supreme(Ker) 742

M.RAMACHANDRAN
Thankamma – Appellant
Versus
Ezhumattur Grama Panchayat – Respondent


JUDGMENT

M. Ramachandran, J.

1. Ext. P1 order issued by the Secretary, Ezhumattoor Grama Panchayat dated 23.1.2001 is under challenge. By Ext. P1, the Secretary of the Panchayat had directed the petitioner to remove some trees, which, on his enquiries, posed a threat to the residence of one K. G. Thomas, the 4th respondent herein. A dead line of seven days had been set for compliance.

2. The petitioner has filed his Original Petition inter alia contending that the Secretary had no jurisdiction to issue such proceedings and the peremptory direction is, therefore, illegal. He further refers to S.238 of the Panchayat Raj Act and stresses on the wording of the Section that it was the Grama Panchayat who was competent to issue notice to the owner of any offending trees and moot proposal for cutting and removing or dealing with them. According to him, as the Panchayat had not taken a decision, the Secretary was incompetent to issue such an order, and it deserves to be set aside, being a nullity.

3. Sri. Siby Mathew, counsel appearing for the Grama Panchayat as also Sri. M. V. S. Namboothiri, the counsel appearing for the 4th respondent submitted that the objections made by the petitioner was




Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top