IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C) No. 10114 of 2007(S)
1. ONE EARTH ONE LIFE (REG.NO.S.246/1988)
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. NATIONAL HIGHWAY AUTHORITY OF INDIA,
3. CHIEF CONSERVATOR OF FORESTS,SOCIAL
For Petitioner :SMT.DAISY A.PHILIPOSE
For Respondent :SRI.THOMAS ANTONY KALLEMPILLYY, SC, NHA.
The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU
The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN
Dated :20/09/2007
O R D E R
H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.
...................................................................................
W.P.(C) No. 10114 OF 2007
...................................................................................
Dated this the 20th September, 2007
J U D G M E N T
H.L. Dattu, C.J.:
The petitioner is a voluntary organization. It is before this court,
complaining violation of certain fundamental rights of the citizens.
2. In this Writ Petition, the petitioner – Organization has sought for the
following reliefs:
“a) Issue a writ of mandamus, directing the respondents 1
to 3 to take immediate and effective steps to plant adequate
number of trees, on the sides of roads, well in advance, before
the bare minimum trees are cut for implementing the projects
for widening the National Highways, State Highways and
District Roads in the State.
b) Issue a writ of mandamus, directing the 1st respondent to
take effective steps to earmark and allot sufficient land for
planting trees on the sides of roads, while implementing the
projects for widening the National Highways, State Highways
and District Roads in the State.
c) Grant such other reliefs that may be deemed fit to this
Honourable Court in the interest of justice. “
3. In our view, if the reliefs sought for by the petitioner is granted, it
would affect a large number of people. Keeping that in view, we had directed
the petitioner to take out notice of this Writ Petition by way of paper
publication, by our order dated 11.07.2007.
W.P.(C) No. 10114 OF 2007
2
4. In spite of long lapse of time, the petitioner-Organization has not
chosen to comply with the orders and directions issued by this court.
5. Now the matter is poster for further orders. The learned counsel for
the petitioner-Organization would submit that the petitioner-Organization does
not have enough financial resources to comply with the orders and directions
issued by this court.
6. The experience of this court is that, after orders are passed in these
type of litigations, persons who would be affected by the order, would
approach this Court with an application to recall the order passed by the court
or file independent petitions to set aside the action initiated by the respondent
authorities pursuant to the orders passed by this Court. This would only lead
to multiplicity of the litigation. In order to avoid possible inflow of several
applications, petitions, etc., we had directed the petitioner Organisation to take
out notice of this petition by paper publication, so that the persons interested in
the lis may come before this Court either to support or resist the relief sought in
the petition. This we had done keeping in view our past experience. The
directions so issued by us is not complied by the petitioner organisation in spite
of long lapse of time, only on the ground hat the petitioner petitioner
organisation has some financial constraints. This statement is not supported
by any material. In the absence of any supporting material, we cannot accept
a bald plea made by the petitioner’s learned counsel.
7. Since there is non-compliance of the orders and directions issued
by this court, by order dated 11.07.2007, in our opinion, the reliefs sought for
by the petitioner-Organization cannot be granted by this Court at this stage.
W.P.(C) No. 10114 OF 2007
3
Accordingly, the Writ Petition requires to be rejected and it is rejected
8. Consequently, pending Interlocutory Applications are also
dismissed.
Ordered accordingly.
H.L. DATTU,
CHIEF JUSTICE.
K.T. SANKARAN,
JUDGE.
lk/DK.