IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
WP(C).No. 20060 of 2010(S)
1. SUBIAR, AGED 55 YEARS,
... Petitioner
Vs
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED
... Respondent
2. THE SECRETARY,
3. THE CHAIRMAN,
For Petitioner :SRI.A.SUBAYER (PARTY IN PERSON)
For Respondent :SRI.K.A.JALEEL, SC., TRIDA
The Hon'ble MR. Justice C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR
The Hon'ble MR. Justice P.S.GOPINATHAN
Dated :12/07/2010
O R D E R
C.N.Ramachandran Nair & P.S.Gopinathan, JJ.
============================================
W.P.(C)No.20060 of 2010
============================================
Dated this the 12th day of July, 2010.
JUDGMENT
Ramachandran Nair, J.
Writ petition is filed for a direction to the
respondents not to proceed with the construction
of Thakaraparambu fly over in Thiruvananthapuram
under the Capital Region Development Programme.
At admission stage, we heard the petitioner in
person, Government Pleader for respondents 1 and
2 and standing counsel for the third respondent.
Petitioner’s case is that the fly over is
absolutely unnecessary and it is a complete waste
of money because, the area where it is proposed
to be constructed is not a priority area and it
will not achieve the purpose of de-congestion of
traffic in the city. Petitioner claims to have
persuaded the Railways to drop the proposal of
WPC20060/10 -:2:-
investment of over Rs.10 crores for controlling
flood in the railway lines. While Government
Pleader seeks time for getting instructions,
counsel for the third respondent submitted that
this petition may be disposed of directing the
petitioner to raise his objections before the
High Level Committee chaired by the Principal
Secretary, Public Works Department. According to
the counsel, Secretary of the third respondent is
the Secretary of the High Level Committee. In
these circumstances, we feel petitioner should be
given first opportunity to represent his
objections before the High Level Committee, so
that the Committee can give priority to any other
work, if the present proposal is found
unnecessary. Writ petition is hence disposed of
with direction to the Secretary, High Level
Committee to put up the petitioner’s
representation in the committee meeting and
WPC20060/10 -:3:-
arrange for a hearing during the meeting so that
the petitioner gets an opportunity to represent
his objections along with other objectors, if
any, who could also be heard together before
finalizing the project, if not already done.
Petitioner will file a representation along with
a copy of this judgment, sketches or other
details before the Secretary, Thiruvananthapuram
Development Authority for him to take up the
matter with the Committee. However, if the work
is in progress, the same need not be stalled on
account of any representation pending
consideration.
C.N.Ramachandran Nair, Judge.
P.S.Gopinathan, Judge.
sl.