P.A.Shaukath Ali vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 12 August, 2010

       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 24723 of 2010(M)


1. P.A.SHAUKATH ALI, AGED 43 YEARS,
                      ...  Petitioner

                        Vs



1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
                       ...       Respondent

2. SEENATH, W/O. BASHEER, PONAKKUZHI,

3. SREENARAYANAPURAM GRAMAPANCHAYATH,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.ESM.KABEER

                For Respondent  : No Appearance

The Hon'ble MR. Justice T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR

 Dated :12/08/2010

 O R D E R
                     T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J.
                     = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
                           W.P.(C) No. 24723 OF 2010
                     = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =

          DATED THIS, THE 12TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2010.

                               J U D G M E N T

Aggrieved by the delay on the part of the first respondent to initiate

proceedings under Section 133 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, this writ

petition has been filed.

2. Petitioner claims to be in possession and ownership of 8.350 cents

of property in Sy. No. 43/13 of Sreenarayanapuram Village. He purchased

the said property from the second respondent. It is pointed out that the

second respondent is causing obstruction to the pathway including the

access to the petitioner’s property. Petitioner, therefore, submitted a petition

under Section 133(d) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the first

respondent to take action against causing nuisance to the pathway, which is

produced as Ext.P2. Petitioner has also filed a representation before the

Gramapanchayat as per Ext.P4 requesting to conduct immediate enquiry

and to stop the alleged unauthorized construction carried on by the second

respondent.

3. Heard. The learned Government Pleader, on getting instructions,

WP(C)24723/2010 2

submitted that the first respondent has called for a report from the Village

Officer concerned and on getting the report alone, further action can be

initiated. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that in view of the

urgency pointed out by the petitioner, the first respondent may be directed

to take a decision in the matter, without delay.

4. Hence there will be a direction to the first respondent to take on

file Ext.P2 and decide whether action is warranted under Section 133 of the

Code of Criminal Procedure. The same will be done as expeditiously as

possible, after getting report of the Village Officer.

The writ petition is accordingly, disposed of. The petitioner will

produce a copy of the writ petition along with a copy of this judgment

before the first respondent for information and compliance.

T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,
JUDGE.

KNC/-