The petitioner has filed this writ petition challenging Ext.P7 order passed by the second respondent under section 406 (3) of the Kerala Municipality Act, 1994. The learned Government Pleader appears for the first respondent. Adv.K.P.Vijayan appears for the second respondent. According to the counsel for the second respondent, the petitioner has a statutory remedy against Ext.P11, which he has not exhausted. 2. I notice that, the petitioner has a statutory remedy against Ext.P11. The petitioner has admittedly not exhausted the same. Therefore, I am not inclined to admit this writ petition. It is for the petitioner to challenge Ext.P11 by invoking the statutory remedy.
This writ petition is, therefore, dismissed without prejudice to the rights of the petitioner to challenge Ext.P11 by invoking his statutory remedy against the same. In order to facilitate the W.P.(C).No.27309 of 2014 2 petitioner to invoke the statutory remedy, it is ordered that Ext.P11 shall not be implemented for a period of ten days.
Sd/-
K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE.
rkc.