IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 24887 of 2009(E)
1. SATHEESH BABU,S/O.VASUDEVAN PILLAI,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE
... Respondent
2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE
3. KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY,KOTTAYAM REP; BY
4. ANAND R.GOURI SADANAM,PUTHENANGADI.P.O,
5. SUSHEELAMMA,GOURI SADANAM,PUTHENANGADI.
6. TALUK SURVEYOR,KOTTAYAM TALUK,KOTTAYAM.
For Petitioner :SRI.A.K.HARIDAS
For Respondent :SRI.SIBY MATHEW
The Hon'ble MR. Justice THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN
Dated :16/09/2009
O R D E R
THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J
...........................................
WP(C).NO. 24887 OF 2009
............................................
DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009
JUDGMENT
Notice to respondents 4 to 6 dispensed with, preserving
their right to seek rehearing, if aggrieved by the directions
contained in this judgment.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned
Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 and learned
standing counsel for third respondent. Alleging that private
respondents have trespassed into a public way, which vests in
the panchayat, there were earlier litigations before this court.
Following the directions of this court, the Municipality considered
the matter and concluded that even if there was reduction of the
width of the road at the relevant location, the question whether it
is because of encroachment, is a matter that could be finally
decided only on appropriate survey and any further proceedings
could be taken only on identifying the land, if any, encroached
upon. While the petitioner states that no due action follows on
such decision, third respondent Municipality states that it has
Wpc 24887/2009 2
written to the survey department to measure out the property
and fix the alignment so that if there is encroachment,
appropriate action could be taken. The Kerala Municipalities Act,
1994 and the Rules framed thereunder and law relating to Land
Conservancy provide the effective measures for recovery of
lands, if any, encroached upon. Those statutory provisions also
have sufficient remedies to any person who is proceeded against
under those laws. But matters cannot be delayed. For this,
survey department has to conclude its action as requested by the
Municipality. Obviously, there cannot be any limited time frame
for the Municipality to finally decide or to take action in the
matter.
3. For the aforesaid reasons, respondents 1 and 2 are
directed to ensure that the application of the third respondent
before the survey authorities are taken up and acted upon in
accordance with law, at the earliest and any required survey is
completed within an outer limit of four months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment. On obtaining report from the
survey department, if further steps are found necessary, third
respondent shall take the necessary steps by commencing
Wpc 24887/2009 3
proceedings, in accordance with law, within a period of four
weeks therefrom. All other issues left open. Writ petition ordered
accordingly.
THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN,
JUDGE
lgk/17/9