IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 23535 of 2010(N)
1. PANIKKER'S LANE RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
... Petitioner
Vs
1. THE KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD
... Respondent
2. THE WATER RESOURCES (MI) DEPARTMENT
3. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
4. THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION
For Petitioner :SRI.V.G.ARUN
For Respondent :SRI.K.JAJU BABU,SC,KERALA ROAD FUND BOA
The Hon'ble MR. Justice S.SIRI JAGAN
Dated :16/08/2010
O R D E R
S.SIRI JAGAN, J.
==================
W.P.(C).No. 23535 of 2010
==================
Dated this the 16th day of August, 2010.
JUDGMENT
The petitioner is a Residents’ Association. They are
aggrieved by the construction of a culvert in the
Sasthamangalam-Vellayambalam road in Trivandrum for the
process of widening the said road. Their grievance is that the
Chief Engineer has given Ext.P7 recommendation in the matter of
construction of that culvert, which has been given a go-by in the
matter. Petitioner therefore seeks the following reliefs:-
i)to issue a writ of mandamus directing the 3rd
respondent to issue necessary directions to the 1st
respondent to forebear from constructing a culvert
across the Sasthamangalam-Vellayambalam road, in
order to collect water from the southern and northern
sides of the road and to flow out the water through the
channel on the northern side of the road;
ii) to declare that the 1st respondent has not been
conferred with the authority to change the existing
drainage system, used for draining out water from the
drains on either side of the Sasthamangalam-
Vellayambalam road;
iii)to issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondent 2
and 4 to take necessary action so as to ensure that the
low lying areas on the northern side of the
Sasthamangalam -Vellayambalam road does not get in
undated due to overflow of water from the channel
carrying the water from the main drain on the side of
the Sasthamangalam-Vellayambalam road, to the
Killiyar thodu;
and
W.P.(C).No. 23535 of 2010 2
iv)to grant such other reliefs as this Honourable Court may
deem fit in the circumstances of this case.
2. The learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel
for the first respondent submits that the matter is now pending
before the 3rd respondent for finalisation pursuant to Ext.P9 and,
therefore, it is only appropriate that the 3rd respondent takes a
final decision in the matter.
Having heard both sides , I dispose of this writ petition with
a direction to 3rd respondent to take final decision in the matter
pursuant to Ext.P9 expeditiously. Needless to say till the 3rd
respondent takes a final decision, the construction of the culvert
shall be kept in abeyance.
S.SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE
mns