The petitioner, who is aggrieved by the decision of the Panchayath to locate a new bus stand in the 5th respondent’s property, has approached the 1st respondent by Exhibit P1 complaint. According to the petitioner, the property belonging to the 5th respondent cannot be utilized for the purpose like bus stand. Therefore, if any decision has to be taken by the 1st respondent in terms of Land Utilization Order, the petitioner shall also be heard on the basis of his objection regarding the utilization of the land by the 5th respondent. 2. In view of the pendency of Exhibit P1, there shall be a direction to the 1st respondent District Collector to take appropriate decision in the matter, after hearing the petitioner as well as the 5th respondent and also the Panchayath. This need be done only if the 5th respondent makes a request for utilizing land in terms of Clause 6 of Kerala Land Utilization Order.
The writ petition is disposed as above.
Sd/- A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE DSV/16/10 JUDGE