IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 29382 of 2010(W)
1. OMANA.K., W/O.K.K.PARAMESWARAN,
... Petitioner
2. VALSALA.K.G., W/O.P.SURENDRAN,
3. SOORAJ.P., S/O.P.SURENDRAN,
Vs
1. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
... Respondent
2. MANAGING DIRECTOR, M/S.CONFIDENT GROUP,
3. I.G.SIVAJI, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT
4. ARULDAS, AGE AND FATHER'S NAME NOT
5. MANDATHARA BHASKARAN,
6. I.M.MUHAMMED, THERUVIPPARAMBIL,
7. P.D.SHARATCHANDRAN, ILLIKKAL,
8. MARADU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MARADU,
For Petitioner :SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH
For Respondent :SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR)
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.M.JOSEPH
The Hon'ble MRS. Justice M.C.HARI RANI
Dated :27/10/2010
O R D E R
K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
* * * * * * * * * * * * *
W.P.C.No.29382 of 2010
----------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of October 2010
J U D G M E N T
K.M.JOSEPH,J
The petitioners have approached this Court seeking the
following reliefs:
i) issue a writ of mandamus, any other writ,
order or direction, directing the 1st respondent
to afford adequate and appropriate police aid
and protection to the life and limb of this
petitioner, against the criminalities of
respondents 2 to 7 and their men.
ii) issue a writ of mandamus, any other writ,
order or direction, directing the 1st respondent
to ensure a decent living to the petitioner, free
from all sorts of threats and inducements.
2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioners is as follows:
3. The petitioners are residing in Maradu Grama
Panchayath. Respondents 3 to 7 are the self claimed leaders of a
‘Mosque Road Vikasana Samithi’. In brief, the case of the
petitioners is that the party respondents are, in the attempt to
widen the existing road, pressurising the petitioners to sign the
W.P.C.No.29382 of 2010 2
consent letter for surrendering their land according to the terms
acceptable to the respondents. There is reference to an assault
on 09/09/2010. The respondents have filed counter affidavit
producing various documents of which Exts.R5(A) is the sketch
and R5(G) purports to be the decision of the Maradu Grama
Panchayath. It is their case that except the petitioners, the
others have surrendered their land. At any rate, the learned
counsel for the party respondents would submit that they have
never threatened the petitioners nor do they intend to threaten
the petitioners. It is also stated that the Panchayat has initiated
steps to acquire the remaining land necessary for widening the
road.
4. We record this submission and leaving it open to the
Panchayat to proceed in the matter in accordance with law, we
dispose of the writ petition.
(K.M.JOSEPH, JUDGE)
(M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE)
jsr
W.P.C.No.29382 of 2010 3
W.P.C.No.29382 of 2010 4
W.P.C.No.29382 of 2010 5
K.M.JOSEPH & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ.
.No. of 200
ORDER/JUDGMENT
30/082010