JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order commanding the 1st respondent to take proper and effective action against the 5th respondent for the encroachment committed by him on Athirakkad Aryanparambu road invoking the provision of rule 3 and 4 of Kerala Panchayat Raj (Removal of Encroachment and Imposition and Recovery of Penalty for Unauthorized Occupation) Rules 1996.

(ii) Survey the lands owned by the petitioner to ascertain the encroachment of land if any by the petitioner after affording him with an opportunity of being heard.

(iii) To pass such other orders or reliefs as this Hon’ble Court deems fit in the interest of justice.” (sic)

2. The main grievance of the petitioner is that there is encroachment on the Panchayat road mentioned in Ext.P2 by the 5th respondent. According to the petitioner, the dispute is regarding Athirakad Aryamparambu road.

3. The counsel for the 5th respondent submitted that there is absolutely no encroachment as stated and the petitioner is submitting about some other road. The dispute is specifically answered in Ext.P3 by the Panchayat.

4. Heard the counsel for the petitioner, the counsel for the Panchayat and the counsel appearing for the 5th respondent.

I also heard the learned Government Pleader.

5. The grievance of the petitioner is that there is encroachment on the Panchayath road. This is disputed by the 5th respondent. This Court sitting in a jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, cannot decide the same. The petitioner can substantiate her case before the 1st respondent. The petitioner can approach the 1st respondent with a representation narrating her grievance. The 1st respondent will consider the same, after giving notice to the petitioner and the

5th respondent. All the contentions raised in this writ petition are left open.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

1. The petitioner is free to submit a representation narrating the grievance raised in this writ petition, before the 1st respondent, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

2. Once such a representation is received, the 1st respondent will consider the same and pass appropriate orders in it, in accordance to law, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 5th respondent.

3. Status-quo as on today shall be maintained, till final orders are passed by the 1st respondent.

sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE das APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16708/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED

26.10.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT AGAINST THE 5TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED

23.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED SENT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT ON

21.01.2022 ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED

12.01.2022 SENT BY 3RD RESPONDENT ADDRESSED TO THE PETITIONER RESPONDENT EXHIBITS Exhibit R 5a TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING REPAIR WORKS EFFECTED ON THE COMPOUND WALL.

Exhibit R5 b TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT BEARING NO. A4-6715/2021 DATED

04.12.2021 Exhibit R 5 c TRUE COPY REPLY ISSUED BY 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 11.01.2021