W.A No.1566 of 2022
1
# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM**
# **PRESENT**
**THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR**
**&**
**THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY**
**THURSDAY, THE 3[RD] DAY OF NOVEMBER 2022 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1944**
## **WA NO. 1566 OF 2022**
**AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENTWP(C) 10428/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA**
## **APPELLANTS:**
|**1**|**COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT SOCIETY**|
|---|---|
||**KUTTAMPUZHA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRPERSON,**|
||**KUTTAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,**|
||**KUTTAMPUZHA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686681**|
|**2**|**SHELLY PRASAD**|
||**AGED 53 YEARS**|
||**W/O. P.G. PRASAD, CHAIRPERSON, CDS KUTTAMPUZHA, KUTTAMPUZHA**|
||**GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KUTTAMPUZHA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. ,**|
||**RESIDING AT PUNNACKAL HOUSE, MAMALAKANDA P.O,**|
||**ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.**|
||**PIN - 686681**|
||**BY ADVS.**|
||**M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY**|
||**MATHEW DEVASSI**|
||**ANANTHAKRISHNAN A. KARTHA**|
||**REMYA M. MENON**|
||**ANOOP SATHYAN**|
## **RESPONDENTS:**
|**1**|**STATE OF KERALA**|
|---|---|
||**REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT,**|
||**DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF-GOVERNANCE SECRETARIAT,**|
||**THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.**|
||**PIN - 695001**|
|**2**|**REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER**|
||**MUVATTUPUZHA, MUVATTUPUZHA RDO OFFICE,**|
||**MUVATTUPUZHA RD, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.**|
||**PIN - 686673**|
|**3**|**TAHASILDAR**|
||**TALUK OFFICE, KOTHAMANGALAM,**|
||**ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.**|
W.A No.1566 of 2022
2
## **PIN – 686666**
- **4 KUTTAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KUTTAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KUTTAMPUZHA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. PIN - 686681**
- **5 PANCHAYAT STANDING COMMITTEE REPRESENTED BY THE PRESIDENT, KUTTAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KUTTAMPUZHA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. PIN - 686681**
- **6 PRESIDENT KUTTAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KUTTAMPUZHA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. PIN - 686681**
- **7 SECRETARY KUTTAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KUTTAMPUZHA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT., PIN - 686681**
- **8 VILLAGE OFFICER KUTTAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KUTTAMPUZHA P.O, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. PIN - 686681 BY ADVS. SRI.K.P.HARISH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.AJITH GEORGE, STANDING COUNSEL**
**THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 03.11.2022, THE**
**COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:**
W.A No.1566 of 2022
3
## **JUDGMENT**
## **Dated this the 3[rd] day of November, 2022**
## **SHAJI P.CHALY,J**
This appeal is filed by the petitioners in W.P.© No.10428/2022, challenging
the judgement of a learned Single Judge dated 21[st] July, 2022, whereby the following reliefs sought for by the petitioners were declined:
i. To issue a writ of certiorari quashing Exhibit P3 as unjust, illegal, arbitrary and unsustainable.
ii. To declare that the petitioners are entitled to continue in the office rooms located at the 1st floor of the 4[th] petitioner Society next to the toilet marked as No. 1 at least for a period of 1 year or till such reasonable time as may be determined by this Hon'ble Court.
iii. To issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents nos. 4 to 7 to open the locks of the door to the office rooms located at the 1st floor of the 4th petitioner Society next to the toilet marked as No. 1 and to allow the petitioners to continue to use the office rooms located at the 1[st] floor of the 4th petitioner Society next to the toilet marked as No. 1.
iv. In the alternative, allow the petitioners to move documents, office equipment etc., for transition and relocation and to direct the respondents to allow the petitioners a reasonable time for moving.
v. Any other writ or direction as this Hon’ble Court may deem fit and necessary.
2. Brief material facts for the disposal of the writ appeal are as follows; the
1[st] appellant is a society and it has office at the first floor of the Kuttampuzha Grama Panchayat – the 4[th] respondent, for the past 17 years. According to the
W.A No.1566 of 2022
4
appellants, all the members and staff of the appellant society carry out their activities from the office space in the said building. The grievance of the appellants is that the Panchayat Committee has taken a decision to shift the office of the appellants from the Panchayat building to a building situated at a distance of about 1 Km. away from the Panchayat office. According to the appellants, even though the appellants have made representations to the Panchayat, the office premises is kept locked, consequent to which, innumerable difficulties are faced. Further, it is contended that if the office of the appellants' society is shifted from the present premises, the society, which is functioning in tandem with the Panchayat, would find it difficult to transact the everyday business with ease. That apart it is submitted that the registers, records, files etc. are kept in the office premises and therefore, seeks direction to the Panchayat to permit the appellants to continue in the office premises.
3. The Grama Panchayat has filed a detailed counter affidavit refuting the contentions advanced by the appellants. Among other contentions, it is stated that the appellants were given two rooms in the first floor of the Panchayat office for the functioning of the society and their possession is mere permissive occupation. It is also stated that the building has only two floors and therefore, the Panchayat finds it difficult to conduct its office due to space constraints and it was on account of the same, the Panchayat has taken a decision to shift the
W.A No.1566 of 2022
5
office of the appellant society. It is also stated that necessary arrangements are made to shift the office of the appellant society to a different building belonging to the Panchayat, which is more extensive, and it would be more convenient for the appellant society to carry out the functions from the said building. That apart it is submitted that sufficient notice was given to the appellant society to vacate the premises and having not done so, the Panchayat had to take a decision to shift the appellant society to a nearby building.
4. The learned Single Judge, after considering the rival submissions, has arrived at the conclusion that when the Panchayat contends that there is space constraints and the premises occupied by the appellants are required for proper functioning of the Panchayat, it would not appropriate on the part of the writ court to take a different stand. Anyhow, considering the request made by the appellants for granting five months time to vacate the premises, three months time was granted, which was extended once for a period of 10 days.
5. We have heard, learned counsel for the appellants Sri.M.P.Madhavankutty, learned Senior Government Pleader Sri.K.P.Harish, learned Standing Counsel for Kuttampuzha Grama Panchayat Sri. Ajith George and perused the pleadings and material on record.
6. The discussion made above would make it clear that there is no allegation
W.A No.1566 of 2022
6
of mala fides made against the elected representatives of the Grama Panchayat or the officials in directing the appellants to vacate the premises. The contention put forth by the Panchayat is that due to space constraints, it requires the premises occupied by the appellants to accommodate its office. It was taking into account various factors and for the effective functioning of the Grama Panchayat that the Panchayat Committee has taken a decision to shift the office of the 1[st] appellant society from the Panchayat building.
7. In our view, it is a policy decision taken by the Panchayat for valid reasons; and the appellant society merely a permissive occupant cannot say that it would have the preference to operate from the premises of the Panchayat building irrespective of the requirement of the Panchayat for utilisation of the space for its own use. Even though learned counsel for the appellants submitted that after the dismissal of the writ petition, an application is submitted before the State Government to be treated as on under under section 191 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, we are of the view that an application under section 191 is a statutory benefit available to any person affected by the decision of a Panchayat Committee, but it cannot be permitted invoked after the issue was considered in the writ petition and has declined the reliefs sought for by the appellants.
8. Anyhow, the learned counsel for the appellants submitted that a further
W.A No.1566 of 2022
7
breathing time may be granted to the appellant society to shift its office to the premises granted by the Grama Panchayat.
9. In that view of the matter, we do not find any reason to interfere with the judgement of the learned Single Judge, there being no jurisdictional error or other legal infirmities, justifying our interference exercising the power under section 5 of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958 in an intra court appeal.
Needless to say, writ appeal fails. Accordingly, it is dismissed; however, in view of the request made by the learned counsel for the appellants to vacate the premises, the appellants are granted time upto 30[th] November, 2022 to shift its office from the Panchayat building.
**Sd/-**
**S.MANIKUMAR**
## **CHIEF JUSTICE**
**Sd/-**
## **SHAJI P.CHALY**
smv
**JUDGE**
W.A No.1566 of 2022
8
## **APPENDIX OF WA 1566/2022**
**PETITIONER ANNEXURES**
**Annexure I A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT GRAMA PANCHAYATH DATED 20.10.2022**
