Peter K Varghese vs The Irrigation Project No 2
2021 Latest Caselaw 22710 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021/28TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                     WP(C) NO. 16467 OF 2021


PETITIONER:

         PETER K VARGHESE, S/O. VARGHESE,
         AGED 55 YEARS, KUNNATHU HOUSE,
         PINARMUNDA, KUNNATHUNAD VILLAGE,
         KUNNATHUNAD TALUK,
         ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 683 565.

         BY ADV PAUL K.VARGHESE


RESPONDENTS:

    1    THE IRRIGATION PROJECT NO.2,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,
         OPPOSITE MUSEUM, PIN 695 033
         REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF ENGINEER.

    2    THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER,
         IRRIGATION PROJECT CIRCLE,
         PIRAVAM 686 664.

    3    THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
         PVIP DIVISION NO.2,
         ALUVA 683 101.

    4    THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
         PVIP SUB DIVISION NO.7,
         KOLENCHERY 682 311.

         SMT.VINITHA B., SR.G.P.

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 19.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C)No.16467/2021

                                2




                          JUDGMENT

Dated this the 19th day of November, 2021

The petitioner who is the owner of 2.40 Acres of land in

Sy.No.397/8 and 937/31 of Kunnathunadu Village of

Ernakulam District has approached this Court seeking to

direct the respondents to take immediate and effective steps

to renovate/reconstruct the damaged bridge passing across

the petitioner's property and also put up necessary

protection wall/iron fencing on either side of the Periyar

Valley canal in that area, at the earliest.

2. The petitioner submits that about 44 years ago, a

portion of the property in question was acquired by the

respondents for constructing an irrigation canal. Due to the

said acquisition, the property in question was fully divided

into two. The width of the canal is more than 15 meters. As

the access from one portion of the divided property to the WP(C)No.16467/2021

other was cut off by the canal, the respondents constructed

a bridge.

3. Due to passage of time, the bridge has weakened

and it is now in a dilapidated and dangerous condition. It is

likely to break down at any point of time. The underground

concrete slab of the bridge is completely damaged and its

damaged steel bars are exposed. The respondents are also

not taking any steps to protect the wall/iron fencing on either

side of the canal. The petitioner submitted Ext.P2

representation. But Ext.P2 did not yield any reply. Hence

the petitioner is before this Court.

4. Ext.P1 photographs would show that the bridge is

in a very dilapidated and dangerous condition and it requires

maintenance. The learned Government Pleader

representing the respondents submitted that as is evident

from Ext.P4, the office of the Executive Engineer, PVIP

Division No.2 has taken up the matter and submitted an WP(C)No.16467/2021

estimate of `1,25,000/- for reconstruction of the bridge

initially. Due to shortage of funds, the project could not be

implemented. It is now decided to include this project in the

proposed plan of 2022-2023. The proposal is to reconstruct

the bridge along with handrail. An estimate has been drawn

for an amount of `3,40,000/-. The work will be started when

action plan is approved and funds are received.

5. In view of the specific statement contained in

Ext.P4 letter dated 24.08.2021 of the Executive Engineer

that the proposal will be included in the action plan of 2022-

2023 and that the bridge will be reconstructed along with

handrails once action plan is approved and funds are

received, no further direction is required in this writ petition.

Accordingly the writ petition is disposed of recording

the statement made by the 3rd respondent Executive

Engineer as contended in Ext.P4. This Court is of the firm

view that taking into consideration the dangerous and WP(C)No.16467/2021

dilapidated situation in which the bridge stands now, the

respondents will ensure that the proposal is implemented

promptly as and when the estimate is approved and funds

are received.

Sd/-

N. NAGARESH JUDGE ncd/19.11.2021 WP(C)No.16467/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16467/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 A TRUE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE CONDITION OF THE BRIDGE.

Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS DATED 5.10.2020.

Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARDS SHOWING THE ACCEPTANCE OF THE EXT, P2 DATED 6.10.2020.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE INTIMATION DATED 24/08/2021 FROM THE 3RD RESPONDENT.