IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 1458 of 2008(W)
1. A. BASHEER KOYA,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE STATE OF KERALA,
... Respondent
2. THE DIRECTOR,
3. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
4. THE GEOLOGIST,
5. THE CITY COMMISSIONER OF POLICE,
6. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
7. S.I. OF POLICE,
8. MANU, S/O. KESAVAN,
9. SALIM, S/O. ABDUL VAHAB,
For Petitioner :SRI.SAJU.S.A
For Respondent :SRI.V.G.ARUN
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :27/06/2008
O R D E R
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI JJ.
-----------------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.1458 OF 2008
-----------------------------------------------------
DATED THIS THE 27th DAY OF JUNE, 2008
J U D G M E N T
Balakrishnan Nair, J.
The petitioner was awarded the execution of the work TFC-
Development of Inland Waterway Main Canal from ISRO Bridge to
Kadinamkulam Kayal Reach I, II and III by the Inland Navigation
Department. The agreements entered into between the
petitioner and the Department are Exhibits P1, P1(a), P1(b) and
P1(c). The petitioner approached this Court alleging that the
local people are causing obstruction to the execution of the work.
During the course of the hearing, certain disturbing facts were
brought to light. The spoil dredged from the canal was found to
contain 97% sand on analysis. The petitioner who removes the
sand from the canal was appropriating it by paying only Rs.10
per metric tonne. The sand escavated during execution of the
work belongs to the Government. But the Government paid the
petitioner for escavating and removing the spoil. All these facts
were brought to the notice of the Government. Now, the
W.P.(C)No.1458/08 -2-
Government have filed a statement, stating that they have decided to
recover the value of the sand removed by the petitioner. We record
the above submissions made by the Government. The learned counsel
for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner does not require any
orders for police protection from this Court. In view of the said
submission, the writ petition is closed. But, the closure of the writ
petition shall not stand in the way of the Government proceeding
against the petitioner as submitted in its statement, in accordance with
law.
K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR,JUDGE.
M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE.
dsn