Thankappan.N vs The Chief Engineer on 4 June, 2009

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 27287 of 2007(W)


1. THANKAPPAN.N.,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. SHAMSUDDIN.E.,

                        Vs



1. THE CHIEF ENGINEER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,

3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

4. SHRI.VIJAYAKUMAR,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.M.V.BOSE

                For Respondent  :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN

 Dated :04/06/2009

 O R D E R
                             S. SIRI JAGAN, J.
                 -------------------------------------------------
                      W.P.(C)No. 27287 OF 2007
                 -------------------------------------------------
                 Dated this the 4th day of June, 2009


                                 JUDGMENT

Petitioners and 15 others who were evicted in 1980 for the

construction of Sakthikulangara portion of Neendakara Harbour.

Petitioners claim that at the time of their eviction they were assured

that they would be suitably rehabilitated. Since they were not so

rehabilitated, the petitioners and others approached this Court by

filing OP No.7880/01 which resulted in Ext.P4 judgment. In that

judgment this Court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Kollam

to look into the grievances of the petitioners with notice to the

petitioners. According to the petitioners, pursuant to that judgment a

notice of hearing, Ext.P5, was also issued and a hearing was

conducted. But no orders were passed. Some other persons who

were similarly affected, approached this Court by filing OP

No.24993/01 in which Ext.P6 judgment was passed, wherein the

assurance of the Government Pleader that unauthorised persons

would not be permitted to occupy the area reserved for the

petitioners and others to the prejudice and interests of the persons

WPC : 27287/07
-:2:-

like the petitioners was recorded. Despite the above happenings,

petitioners submit that in the 17 stalls constructed subsequently,

which were intended for allotment to the petitioners and others,

strangers were accommodated, whereas the petitioners were

accommodated in temporary sheds. It is under the above

circumstances, the petitioners have filed this writ petition seeking the

following reliefs:

“i. to call for the entire records leading to Ext.P5 and;

ii. to issue a writ of mandamus compelling the respondents to

refrain from permitting outsiders to enter Sakthikulangara portion

of Neendakara Fishing Harbour for the supply of tea and snacks

there.

iii. to direct the respondents not to go ahead with the action to call

for tenders to supply baskets and mats in Sakthikulangara portion

of Harbour.”

2. A statement has been filed by the 3rd respondent which

reads thus:

“It is submitted that all the allegations and prayer of the
petitioner is almost the same as that of OP No.7880/1, filed by

Sri.Gopalakrishna Pillai and others which was disposed by this

Hon’ble Court by Ext.P4 by directing the Revenue Divisional

Officer, Kollam to look into the grievances of the petitioners and to

take appropriate action in accordance with law in the matter.

Sri.N.Thankappan and Sri.Shamsudeen A were the 4th and 10th

WPC : 27287/07
-:3:-

petitioner of OP No.7880/01 respectively. This case was heard by

the Revenue Divisional Officer and is awaiting orders.

2. It is submitted that we had been inviting tenders annually for the

right of sale of basket and mat in the Sakthikulangara and

Neendakara side of Neendakara Fishing Harbour for the last 10

years. We had invited tenders this year too for the right of selling

basket and mat in the Sakthikulangara side and Neendakara side.

For the right of seeling basket and mat in the Sakthikulangara side

of this year, P.Albert, Madathail Kizhakkethil House,

Sakthikulangara offered Rs.15,000/- (Rupees fifteen thousand only)

per annum as the higher bidder of the tender and executed

agreement with him vide agreement No.16/06-07/NF dated

06.03.07.

3. It is true that the photo marked as Ext.P2 is of shops

constructed at the Sakthikulangara side of Neendakara Fishing

Harbour. The shops are constructed with brick masonry and AC

sheets. The petitioner’s allegation that theywere accommodated

only in temprorary shed whereas the unauthorised petty traders

were accommodated in the permanent shed, is not true to the

facts. Because the photograph marked as Ext.P2 is the type of

shops allocated for the other eighteen traders, the unauthorised

occupants, as claimed by the petitioners. There is no other type of

construction made for allocation of these petty traders. In fact the

shops were allotted to them and the rent for the same was ficed as

per the direction of the Court in Ext.P1.”

3. I have heard both sides. Ext.P5 notice of hearing was

issued on 11.10.06. In the statement filed on 20.11.07, there is no

mention as to what happened thereafter. Today when the matter

WPC : 27287/07
-:4:-

was taken up, on the basis of telephonic instructions, the learned

Government Pleader submits that no final orders have been passed

yet. This is a sad situation. I do not want to make any further

comments on the same, insofar as the learned counsel for the

petitioner submits that the RDO may be directed to pass orders in the

matter after considering all the grievances of the petitioners.

In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with

a direction to the 2nd respondent to pass orders as contemplated in

Ext.P4, taking into account the grievances mentioned in Ext.P4 as

well as other grievances of the petitioners, after affording an

opportunity of being heard to the petitioners, as expeditiously as

possible, at any rate, within one month from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment.

S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
ttb