High Court Kerala High Court

Kunju vs District Collector on 2 July, 2010

Kerala High Court
Kunju vs District Collector on 2 July, 2010
       

  

  

 
 
  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C).No. 18047 of 2010(E)


1. KUNJU, THIRUNJAKODE,
                      ...  Petitioner
2. THATHA, W/O. KUNJU,
3. JAYAKRISHNAN,

                        Vs



1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD.
                       ...       Respondent

2. DEPUTY COLLECTOR (GENERAL),

3. THE SECRETARY,

4. BLOCK PROGRAMME OFFICER,

5. TALUK SURVEYOR,

6. ILLYAS, S/O. MUTHU RAWTHER,

7. VASU, S/O. PONNAN,

                For Petitioner  :SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN

                For Respondent  :SRI.S.MOHAMMED AL RAFI

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

 Dated :02/07/2010

 O R D E R
                       T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J.
                    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                      W.P.(C) No.18047 of 2010-E
                    - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
                  Dated this the 2nd day of July, 2010.

                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioners are residents of Thirinjakode Schedueld Caste

Colony. The third petitioner is the beneficiary of the panchayat road

proceeding south from Thottinpalla junction of Ayalur Village, Chittur

Taluk which connects the colony with the main road. It is pointed out that

all the members of the colony are agricultural labourers.

2. As per the National Employment Guarantee Scheme, the Central

Government granted a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- to build the side walls of the

colony for preventing soil erosion. There is a pathway leading to north and

respondents 6 and 7 are residing on the side of the pathway. The allegation

raised by the petitioners is that because of the encroachment of the pathway

by respondents 6 and 7, the work in question cannot be effectively

completed, which require removal of encroachment by the Panchayat.

Accordingly, they filed Ext.P2 complaint and the Panchayat has requested

the Taluk Surveyor to conduct the measurement of the area, as per Ext.P6.

Since the further action in the matter is not being completed, this writ

petition is filed seeking for various reliefs.

wpc 18047/2010 2

3. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners, learned Standing

Counsel for the Panchayat, learned Govt. Pleader and learned counsel for

respondents 6 and 7. It is submitted by the learned Standing Counsel for the

Panchayat that the Panchayat has already requested the Taluk Surveyor as

well as the Village Officer to identify the encroachment, if any, by

measuring the width of the pathway based on the Village records, etc. It is

submitted that they are yet to get a reply from the Taluk Surveyor. Learned

counsel appearing for respondents 6 and 7 submitted that on their part there

is no encroachment, which will be substantiated by production of records

before the Panchayat at the time of hearing.

4. What remains to be done is the taking of measurement by the

Taluk Surveyor with reference to the Village records, etc. Therefore, there

will be a direction to the fifth respondent to take appropriate action as

requested for by the Panchayat as per Ext.P6 and complete the same within

a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Based on the report, plan and other details furnished by the Taluk Surveyor,

the Panchayat will take appropriate action as enjoined by law. If any action

is proposed against respondents 6 and 7, then the Panchayat will issue

appropriate notices to them and respondents 6 and 7 will be granted

sufficient opportunity to furnish objections in the matter and only after

wpc 18047/2010 3

hearing them, further action, if any will be taken.

The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs.

(T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.)

kav/