IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1207 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 VARKEY CHAKKALAYIL,
AGED 70 YEARS
S/O MATHAI, AGED 70 YEARS, CHAKKALAYIL HOUSE,
KODENCHERY P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN- 673 504
2 JOLLY @ DOMINIC
S/O JOSEPH, AGED 67 YEARS, THEKKEKKARA HOUSE,
INGAPUZHA P.O., THAMARASSERY VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN- 673 504
BY ADVS.
BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA
M.G.SREEJITH
ARCHANA K.S
RESPONDENTS:
1 RAJESH KUMAR SINHA IAS
AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER ARE NO KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONERS,
WORKING AS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND WILD LIFE,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001
2 RAJESH RAVINDRAN IFS
AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONERS,
WORKING AS CUSTODIAN OF ECOLOGICALLY FRAGILE LANDS,
FOREST HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 014
SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SPL.GP (FOREST)
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO.1207 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 1st day of June, 2022 This Court, by judgment dated 02.02.2021 in W.P.(C) No.42528 of 2018, directed the respondents to handover possession of the land in question to the petitioners within a period of four months.
2. As the respondents did not comply with the said direction, the petitioners filed this Contempt of Court Case.
3. The 2nd respondent filed an affidavit dated 05.02.2022. In the affidavit, the 2 nd respondent has stated that though the petitioners were intimated that land is being restored and the land was sought to be formally handed over by proper notice, the petitioners have refused to take over the land stating that the Forest Department is not handing over another piece of forest land which they need as a way. CON.CASE(C) NO.1207 OF 2021 3
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that unless access to the property is granted, the direction given by this Court in the judgment dated 02.02.2021, would become meaningless.
5. This Court finds that the question of right to pathway/access was not an issue involved in W.P.(C) No.42528 of 2018. The learned counsel for the petitioners pointed out that this is an issue of deemed vesting of the property. Therefore, when the Tribunal found that the property has not been vested with the respondents, naturally the access to the property available to the petitioners should be maintained. This Court finds that this is not an issue to be decided in this Contempt of Court Case. The petitioners will be at liberty to agitate their rights, if any, through appropriate proceedings.
6. As regards the Contempt of Court Case is concerned, the respondents are ready to handover possession CON.CASE(C) NO.1207 OF 2021 4 to the petitioners, if the petitioners approach the respondents.
In view of the stand so taken, this Court does not find any reason to proceed with the Contempt of Court Case. The Contempt of Court Case is therefore closed.
sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE hmh CON.CASE(C) NO.1207 OF 2021 5 APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1207/2021 PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2-2-
2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO. 42528/2018 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.05.2021 ISSUED TO THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SURVEY, KOZHIKODE ANNEXURE R2(B) TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.A2-817/2021 DATED 23.06.2021 ANNEXURE R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE DE-NOTIFICATION SCHEDULE NO.EFL 1-111/2022 DATED 03.02.2022 ANNEXURE R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ORDER NO..EFL 1-111/2022 DATED 03.02.2022