Salim A.M vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 14867 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                      PRESENT
                     THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SATHISH NINAN
         THURSDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 24TH ASHADHA, 1943
                             WP(C) NO. 12611 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

              SALIM A.M
              AGED 50 YEARS
              S/O MUHAMMED PILLAI, ELAVAMKUDI HOUSE, MUKKUTTINADA,
              PONJASSERRI PO, PERUMBAVOOR.

              BY ADVS.
              M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
              JOSEPH GEORGE



RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, CIVIL LINES, KAKKANAD, COCHIN - 682030.

     2        VAZHAKKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MARAMPILLY, ALUVA, ERNAKULAM
              DISTRICT, PIN 683107. REP. BY ITS SECRETARY.

     3        VENGOLA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, VENGOLA, PERUMBAVOOR, ERNAKULAM
              DISTRICT PIN 683554.

     4        AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, MARAMPILLY, ALUVA,
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 683107.

     5        AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, VENGOLA, PERUMBAVOOR,
              ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN 683556.

              BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI.RAVIKRISHNAN
              BY ADV. C.A. NIVAS


     THIS     WRIT    PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
15.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                  SATHISH NINAN, J.
         ==================
             W.P. (C) No.12611 of 2021
         ==================
         Dated this the 15th day of July, 2021

                      JUDGMENT

The petitioner cultivates paddy in 28.5 Acres

of paddy field situated within the local limits of the third respondent Panchayat. The petitioner is

aggrieved by an alleged unscientific construction

of a check dam having a height of 125 cm by the

second respondent Panchayat which causes heavy

floods in the neighbouring paddy fields including

that of the petitioner.

2. Ext.P3 resolution was passed by the third

respondent Panchayat requesting the first

respondent to reduce the height of the check dam

and also to provide two sluices. The petitioner

relies on Ext.P1 report of the the Village Officer

dated 05.02.2019 and Ext.P2 report of the Assistant

Engineer, Minor Irrigation Section to canvass the

contention that the construction of the check dam

is unscientific. In Ext.P2, the Assistant Engineer

recommended to bring down the height of the check W.P. (C) No.12611 of 2021

dam to 30 cm and also to provide two sluices.

3. The petitioner had earlier approached this

Court in WP(C) 25457/2019 seeking a direction to

the second respondent Panchayat to remove the check

dam. The writ petition was disposed by this Court,

as per Ext.P4 judgment, directing the first

respondent-District Collector to look into the

issue and take remedial measures. Pursuant thereto

the first respondent passed Ext.P5 order, directing

the height of the check dam be reduced from 120 cm

to 90 cm. The petitioner seeks for reduction of the

height to 30 cm and to provide two sluices as

recommended by the Assistant Engineer in Ext.P2.

4. The third respondent Panchayat has passed

Ext.P6 resolution noticing that reduction of the

height to 90 cm as directed by the first respondent

would not solve the issue and decided to request

the Collector for appropriate action.

5. The petitioner contends that due to the

flood caused consequent on the unscientific check

dam, huge damages is being caused by destruction of

paddy. He has submitted Ext.P10 representation W.P. (C) No.12611 of 2021

before the first respondent for appropriate action.

The representation though submitted on 12.04.21, no

action has been taken thereon, grieves the

petitioner.

6. Without expressing anything on merits, the

writ petition is disposed of directing the first

respondent to consider Ext.P10 representation with

due notice to the petitioner and respondents 2 and

3 Panchayats, and pass orders thereon, as

expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a

period of one month from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

SATHISH NINAN JUDGE

kns/-

//True Copy// P.S. to Judge WP(C) NO. 12611 OF 2021 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS:-

EXT.P1 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE VILLAG OFFICER, VENGOLA VILLAGE TO THE TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUNADU DATED 05.2.19.

EXT.P2 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPORT SENT BY THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION SECTION, PATTIMATTOM PERMBAVOOR TO ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION SUB DIVISION, ALUVA DATED 22.8.19.

EXT.P3 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE GRAMA PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE OF 3RD RESPONDENT GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 20.2.19

EXT.P4 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE KERALA HIGH COURT IN WPC 25457/19 DATED 30.10.19.

EXT.P5 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 29.2.20.

EXT.P6 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RESOLUTION OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT GRAMA PANCHAYAT IS PRODUCED DATED 17.3.20.

EXT.P7 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPLY ISSUED BY THE STATE PUBLIC INFORMATION OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT TO SABU KK DATED 25.11.20.

EXT.P8 A TRUE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT WATER LEVEL NEAR THE CHECK DAM DATED NIL.

EXT.P9 A TRUE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT WATER LEVEL NEAR THE CHECK DAM DATED NIL.

EXT.P10 A PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN DETAIL TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12.4.21.

-----