Kerala Resident Moves High Court Against Ombudsman For Local Self-Govt Institutions, Invokes Legal Maxim 'Boni Judicis Est Ampliare Jurisdictionem'

Tellmy Jolly

8 Jan 2024 1:59 PM GMT

  • Kerala Resident Moves High Court Against Ombudsman For Local Self-Govt Institutions, Invokes Legal Maxim Boni Judicis Est Ampliare Jurisdictionem

    A plea has been moved before the Kerala High Court against alleged inaction of the Ombudsman for the Local Self Government Institutions (LSGI) in discharging his legal and statutory duties for the prevention and demolition of illegal constructions.Relying upon the legal maxim, 'Boni Judicis Est Ampliare Jurisdictionem' the plea has been filed seeking a direction to the Ombudsman and the...

    A plea has been moved before the Kerala High Court against alleged inaction of the Ombudsman for the Local Self Government Institutions (LSGI) in discharging his legal and statutory duties for the prevention and demolition of illegal constructions.

    Relying upon the legal maxim, 'Boni Judicis Est Ampliare Jurisdictionem' the plea has been filed seeking a direction to the Ombudsman and the Gram Panchayat Secretary to stop alleged illegal construction adjacent to petitioner's property. The legal maxim means 'Good justice is Broad Jurisdiction' which envisages for amplification of legal remedies, without usurping the jurisdiction and applying rules for the advancement of justice.

    Justice Murali Purushothaman admitted the plea and issued notice to the Panchayat Secretary and the private party allegedly indulging in illegal construction activities. Notice to the Ombudsman has been dispensed with for the time being.

    To give a brief background of the case, the Ombudsman had earlier directed the Panchayat Secretary to consider the petitioner's grievance and accordingly, the Secretary had issued an order prohibiting further constructions and for the demolition of alleged illegal constructions. This order was however set aside by the Tribunal for LSGI citing technical grounds with liberty to the Secretary to initiate fresh proceedings. As the Secretary failed to do so, the petitioner again approached the Ombudsman who this time, as alleged, returned the petitioner without passing any formal orders.

    The petitioner avers that inaction and refusal of the Ombudsman to consider his grievance resulted in delay and maladministration. He also submitted that the respondents have failed to perform their statutory duties under the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act, 1994.

    It was also averred that the ombudsman has to provide efficacious and speedy justice delivery to the common man. It was argued that the inaction of the Ombudsman has caused negation of the legal maxim 'Boni Judicis Est Ampliare Jurisdictionem'.

    The petitioner is represented by Advocate S. Nikhil Sankar

    Case title: Vijukumar v Secretary & Others

    Case number: WP(C) 526/2024

    Next Story