Kerala High Court
Muhammed Afsal vs District Police Chief on 15 January, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 25TH POUSHA, 1942
WP(C).No.33317 OF 2019(L)
PETITIONER/S:
MUHAMMED AFSAL,
AGED 33 YEARS,
S/O.USMAN, KURUDENTTAYYATH, P.V.NORTH, THAZHAVA P.O.,
KARUNAGAPPALLY.
BY ADVS.
SRI.R.SUNIL KUMAR
SMT.A.SALINI LAL
RESPONDENT/S:
1 DISTRICT POLICE CHIEF,
SUPERINTEND OFFICE, ALAPPUZHA- 690001.
2 DEPUTY SUPERINTEND OF POLICE,
DY.S.P OFFICE, CHENGANNUR- 689121.
3 SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
NOORNADU POLICE STATION, NOORNADU- 690504.
4 MADHAVAN PILLAI,
MANOJ BHAVANAM, CHATTIYARA, THAMARAKULAM- 690530.
5 MADHU,
MEENATHUTHUNDIL, CHATTIYARA, THAMARAKULAM- 690530.
6 SURESH,
KINARUVILA, CHATTIYARA, THAMARAKULAM- 690530.
R4 TO R6 BY ADV. SRI.N.ASHOK KUMAR
R1 TO R3 SRI P P THAJUDEEN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
15.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.33317 OF 2019 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner states that he is the absolute owner in title and
possession of property having an extent of 80 cents comprised in various
survey numbers and situated within the limits of Thamarakkulam Village.
The petitioner decided to put up a residential building in the said property
for which purpose, he approached the Panchayat and obtained Ext.P1
permit. Based on his application, Ext.P2 development permit has also
been issued by the Panchayat. Since some amount of earth is to be
removed, he approached the Department of Mining and Geology and by
Ext.P3 pass, the petitioner was permitted to remove 610 m 3 of earth
subject to various conditions. When the petitioner commenced work on
the property, obstruction was caused by the party respondents. They were
of the view that the petitioner would bring in large vehicles and encroach
upon their property which is lying on either sides of the pathway leading to
the property of the petitioner. He contends that the vehicle was obstructed
and the respondents have taken an illegal stand that they would not
permit the petitioner to carry out the construction. In the said
circumstances, the petitioner approached the 3rd respondent and lodged a
complaint. When no action was taken, he had to approach the 2nd
respondent with the very same grievance. Complaining of inaction, the
petitioner is before this Court seeking a direction to the respondents 1 to 3
to afford adequate protection to the life of the petitioner and for removing
red earth from his property in accordance with the permits issued by the
local authority as well as the Geologist, without any threat or injury from
the party respondents.
2. Notice was served to the party respondents. There is no
appearance.
3. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted
that based on the complaints lodged by the party respondents, the permit
issued to the petitioner was cancelled and the same was challenged before
this Court. This Court by Ext.P6 judgment, set aside the order and
directed the panchayat to reconsider the same. It is stated that Ext.P7
order was later issued by the Panchayat restoring the construction permit.
It is further stated that the department of Mining and Geology has issued
Ext.P8 permit by which, the petitioner has been permitted to remove 610
m3 of ordinary earth for the purpose of levelling the land. The permit is
valid from 18.1.2021 to 22.1.2021. It is stated that the petitioner will have
to remove the earth during the period permitted by the Geologist and
prays that necessary directions be issued to the police to grant protection
to the petitioner to carry out the work.
4. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted
that the grievance of the local residents is that the petitioner would bring
in 15 ton vehicles to remove the sand and if the same is done, the
pathway leading to the property would be destroyed. They also have a
grievance that some damages would be caused to the property lying on
either side of the pathway. To prevent such occurrences, the petitioner be
directed to bring in vehicles with a maximum load of less than 7 tons.
5. I have considered the submissions advanced. I find that the
petitioner secured permits from the local authority as well as the Geologist
for carrying out constructions and also for removing the earth. Though
notice was served on the party respondents, none appears. From the
submissions of the learned Government Pleader it appears that the
apprehension of the local residents is that the petitioner would bring in
large vehicles and cause damage to the pathway and boundary. To
safeguard the interest of the nearby residents, necessary directions can be
issued to the petitioner to use vehicles with less than 7 ton capacity to
remove the earth. As the petitioner is armed with all permits, there is no
justification on the part of the party respondents in causing any
obstruction to the construction. In that view of the matter, this writ
petition is disposed of directing the police to afford adequate protection to
the life and property of the petitioner and also to ensure that no illegal
obstruction is caused to the construction activities carried out in terms of
Exts.P7 and P8. The petitioner shall use vehicles with a maximum load of
upto 7 tons to remove the sand.
This writ petition is disposed of.
SD/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
DSV
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT.
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE PERMIT AND PASS ISSUED BY THE
GEOLOGIST.
EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 3RD
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE COMPLAINT BEFORE THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.33884/2019.
EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A4/5271/2019 DATED
30/11/20.
EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT
GEOLOGIST NO.84/2019-
20/MM/OE/DOA/1737/2019 DATED 13.01.2021.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE
