Point of law: Section 276 of the K P R Act deals with the hierarchical statutory remedies of appeal and revision.

JUDGMENT :

Since Common issues arise for consideration in these writ petitions, they were heard together and are disposed of by this common judgment. The respondents and the status in which they are arrayed in both writ petitions are the same and the exhibits referred to hereinbelow shall be as obtaining in W.P.(C) No.4367/2022.

2. The petitioner in W.P. (C). No. 24389 of 2021 is a Company which is engaged in the business of running hospitals and has a 63 bed hospital at Thaneermukkam Grama Panchayat, the 3rd respondent (hereinafter referred to as the 'Panchayat'). The petitioner is aggrieved by Ext. P3 resolution dated 28.09.2021 of the Panchayat permitting the setting up of a Fecal Sludge Treatment Plant (FSTP) by the 2nd respondent, the Cherthala Municipality ('Municipality' for short), in the puramboke property vested in the Panchayat and lying adjacent to the premises of the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the land where the FSTP is proposed to be set up is a community property vested in the Panchayat and can be used only for the benefit of the villagers as specified in Section 171 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994 (hereinafter referred to as 'K P R Act' for short), and not for the use of the residents of the Municipality. The petitioner contends that, the decision of the Panchayat to set up the FSTP is vitiated by political reasons and is against the norms of the Kerala State Pollution Control Board, the 4th respondent.

3. The petitioner in W.P. (C). No. 4367 of 2022 is the Director and Chief Medical Officer of K.V.M. Hospital, Cherthala and is aggrieved by the proposal to set up the aforesaid FSTP in the community property vested in the Panchayat and lying adjacent to his premises. According to the petitioner, the distance between the proposed FSTP and his hospital is only 34 meters and the same violates the conditions prescribed by the Pollution Control Board in Ext. P3 'consent to establish' the plant and that there is no proper and scientific procedure for handling the treated water and slurry. The petitioner, therefore, seeks for a direction to quash Ext. P1 resolution of the Panchayat (Ext. P3 in W.P. (C). No. 24389 of 2021) and Ext. P3 'consent to establish' the plant issued by the Pollution Control Board.

4. On 07.04.2022, this Court passed a common order in the writ petitions as hereunder:-

“The grievance in both these writ petitions is with respect to the proposal to install a FSTP of point 0.25 MLD capacity adjacent to the property of the petitioner. The learned standing counsel for the Municipality submits that the process of tendering the work is going on and technical bid alone has been opened. Since the petitioners are not challenging the tender process, this Court will not be justified in interfering with the same. However, no work shall be started with regard to the said project without obtaining orders from this Court. Respondents may place their counter affidavits on record.”

The respondents 1 to 3 have, accordingly, placed their counter affidavits on record and the Kerala State Pollution Control Board has filed a report in W.P. (C). No. 24389 of 2021. The respondents 1 to 3 have taken a contention that the writ petitions are not maintainable in view of the alternate remedy available to the petitioners under Section 191 of the K P R Act.

5. The petitioners have also filed their reply affidavits.

6. Heard Smt. Radhika Rajasekharan, the learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. Surya Binoy, the learned Senior Government Pleader, Sri. J. Omprakash, the learned counsel for the Municipality, Sri. Darsan Somanath, the learned counsel for the Panchayat and Sri. T. Naveen, the learned standing counsel for the Kerala State Pollution Control Board.

7. It is trite that when the question of maintainability of a writ petition is raised, the said issue has to be considered first before sallying forth into a discussion and decision on the merits. Accordingly, the counsel were heard on the question of maintainabi