The court confirmed the Panchayat's authority to regulate construction compliance and upheld the right to further complaints regarding any violations.

JUDGMENT

The above Writ Petition (C) is filed with the following prayers:

" i) To issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 2^nd respondent to ensure that the 4^th respondent shall not continue the construction of the building or execution of the work in disobedience of Exhibit.P4 and in violation of building Rules, by taking necessary assistance from the 3^rd respondent;

ii) To issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 2^nd respondent to remove the construction of the building or execution of the work in violation of Exhibit.P4 by taking necessary assistance from the

3^rd respondent;

iii) To issue a Writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order or direction directing the 2^nd respondent to take necessary action on Exhibit.P5 complaint within a time frame fixed by this Honourable Court."

[SIC]

2. The main prayer in this writ petition is to issue a direction to the 2^nd respondent to ensure that the 4^th respondent is not continuing with the construction of the building or execution of work in disobedience of Ext.P4 stop-memo. This Court directed the Panchayat to file a statement. A statement is filed by the respondents 1 and 2. It will be better to extract paragraphs Nos.4 to 6:

" 4. However, on 10/10/2024, the petitioner herein had filed a complaint alleging that the construction being carried out in violation of permit issued by the panchayat. Thereby, the Engineer, LSGD conducted a site inspection and submitted a report. Based on the report, a notice was issued to the 4^th respondent on 25/11/2024, stating that the construction work can only be continued at the said place after obtaining a revised permit as per the plan that has been clarified regarding the boundary of both the parties and as per the plan. The said notice was affixed on the site as the 4th respondent failed to accept the same. Thus, the panchayat has stopped the construction carried out by the 4^th respondent as Engineer, LSGD found discrepancies in construction and the same is in violation of the approved building permit. In Exhibit.P4, a direction was issued to the 4^th respondent to submit a reply otherwise necessary proceedings under Section 235W of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act will be initiated.

5. It is true that, the panchayat is also aware of the litigation between the petitioner and the 4^th respondent before the Munsiff Court, Chavakkad as well as the District Court, Thrissur.

6. Subsequently, on the basis of another complaint of the petitioner dated 13/05/2025, the engineer, LSGD again inspected the site and reported that the construction carried out by the 4^th respondent was not in accordance with the plan. Thereby, on 08/07/2025, the secretary himself inspected the site and found that the old disputed wall that existed at the site and which was mentioned in the Munsiff's Court's order is no longer in existence. It is also submitted that no construction activities are currently underway at the site and it's been observed that the 4^th respondent had partially constructed the floor."

3. In the light of the same, it is clear that the Panchayat is taking action. If there is any violation from the side of the 4^th respondent, the petitioner can bring it to the notice of the Panchayat, and the Panchayat authorities will inspect the premises with notice to the petitioner and the 4^th respondent. If there is any violation, the Panchayat will take appropriate action in accordance with the law.

With the above observations, this writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-