Sainulabdeen vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 4544 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                            PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

  MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021/19TH MAGHA,1942

                   WP(C).No.27928 OF 2017(M)

PETITIONER:
              SAINULABDEEN,
              S/O MOIDEEN KANNU,
              AGED 70 YEARS,
              MSH BUILDINGS, KUNJALUMMOODU,
              KARAMANA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.K.S.ARUN KUMAR
              SRI.JUSTINE JACOB
              SMT.RESHMI THOMAS
              SRI.P.A.VIBIN

RESPONDENTS:
      1     STATE OF KERALA,
            REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
            REVENUE(DRFA) DEPARTMENT,
            GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.

     2        SUB DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE/RDO,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695001.
     3        M.JUNAIDHA,
              AGED 37 YEARS, W/O SHAJAHAN,
              MUTHOTTUKUNNIL VEEDU, T.C NO.19/1344,
              TAMALAM, POOJAPPURA P.O.,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695012.

     4        SIDHIQUI BEEVI,
              D/O SHAMSUDEEN, TC NO.19/1285,
              KATTUVILAKOM, KUNJALUMMOODU, KARAMANA,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695002.

            R3 BY ADV. RAJU P MATHEWS
            R3 BY ADV. SMT.AMRUTHA P.S.
            R4 BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER
            R4 BY ADV. K.V.SURESH KUMAR
            R1-2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT DEEPA NARAYNAN
     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 08.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.27928/2017
                                :2 :




                        JUDGMENT

~~~~~~~~~

Dated this the 8th day of February, 2021

By Ext.P7, the Sub Divisional Magistrate passed an

order to construct a retaining wall adjacent to the property of

the 3rd respondent and to recover the amount spent therefor

from the petitioner. It is aggrieved by the said direction that

the petitioner is before this Court.

2. When this writ petition came up for hearing today,

the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent submitted that

retaining wall has already been constructed by the 4th

respondent and the 3rd respondent has no subsisting

grievance against the petitioner.

3. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions,

submitted that the Government has not spent any money for

construction of the retaining wall. WP(C) No.27928/2017

In view of the submissions made above, this writ

petition is closed recording that no amount is liable to be

recovered from the petitioner, for the purpose of the

construction of retaining wall in question.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

aks/08.02.2021 WP(C) No.27928/2017

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT) NO.1160/17/REV DATED 16.3.2017.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 8.6.2009.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 1.6.2010 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.7.2011 IN CRL.RP NO.84/2010 OF THE HON'BLE ADDL. SESSIONS COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 6.6.2016 IN HR MP NO.3931/2016 OF KERALA STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18.4.2017 IN MC-1-9501/16 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

SR