Basheer vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 20426 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 9TH ASWINA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 14635 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:

    1     BASHEER
          AGED 58 YEARS
          S/O. CHEKKU MOHAMMAD, MOZHIKKALTHEKKENODI HOUSE,
          CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
          673645.

    2     MOHAMMAD ABDUL RAHIMAN
          S/O.C.K.SULAIMAN, AGED 38 YEARS, CHOLAKKARA HOUSE,
          CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
          673645.

    3     KUTTY HASAN
          S/O.UNNIMOYI, AGED 72 YEARS, CHULAICHALIL HOUSE,
          CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
          673645.

    4     SUDHAKARAN
          S/O.UNNIYERI, AGED 62 YEARS, PARAMBIL HOUSE,
          CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
          673645.

    5     ABDUL KAREEM
          S/O. ALI HASAN, AGED 57 YEARS, KALATHUNNODI HOUSE,
          CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
          673645.

    6     JAYARAJAN
          S/O.UNNIYERI, AGED 49 YEARS, PARAMBIL HOUSE,
          CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
          673645.

    7     SIVADASAN
          S/O.UNNIYERI, AGED 54 YEARS, PARAMBIL HOUSE,
          CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
          673645.

    8     JANEESH
          S/O.BALAN, AGED 38 YEARS, PARAMBIL HOUSE, CHERUVAYOOR
          P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673645.
 WP(C) NO. 14635 OF 2021      2



    9    BALASUBRAMANIAM
         S/O.CHANDUKUTTY, AGED 54 YEARS,CHUZHICHALIL HOUSE,
         CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
         673645.

   10    ABDUL SALAM
         S/O.IBRAHIM, AGED 55 YEARS, CHUNDAKADAN HOUSE,
         CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
         673645.

   11    USMAN
         AGED 46 YEARS, POONTHOTTATHIL HOUSE,
         KARIYATHRAKUZHI, CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM,
         MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 673645.

   12    SASHIKUMAR
         S/O.UNNIKUMARAN, AGED 56 YEARS, PARAMBIL HOUSE,
         CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
         673645.

   13    SADANANDAN
         S/O.KESHU, AGED 58 YEARS, CHUZHICHALIL HOUSE,
         CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
         673645.

   14    NANDAKUMAR
         S/O.UNNIKUMARAN, AGED 48 YEARS, PARAMBIL HOUSE,
         CHERUVAYOOR P.O., ELAMARAM, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
         673645.

         BY ADV MILLU DANDAPANI



RESPONDENTS:

    1    STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO REVENUE
         DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
         THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

    2    DISTRICT COLLECTOR
         COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM - 676505.

    3    DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT
         OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT,
 WP(C) NO. 14635 OF 2021               3

           CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM - 676505.

     4     THE TAHSILDAR (LA)
           KONDOTTI, KONDOTTI TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT -
           673638.

     5     VILLAGE OFFICER
           VAZHAKKADU VILLAGE, VAZHAKKADU, MALAPPURAM
           DISTRICT - 673640.

     6     THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
           NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION, CIVIL STATION,
           MALAPPURAM - 676505.

     7     EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
           OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS
           DEPARTMENT, MALAPPURAM - 676505.


OTHER PRESENT:

          SMT. RESMITHA RAMACHANDRAN- GP




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   01.10.2021,   THE   COURT   ON       THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 14635 OF 2021           4

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioners, in essence, contend that the

alignment now proposed by the respondents, for

expansion of a particular road entering into the

State Highway be altered, so that their properties

can be saved.

2. The petitioners submit that various

allegations have been unfairly made against them by

the respondents, including that they are in illegal

possession of their properties and assert that all

these are incorrect. They add that they have placed

the true facts before the 7th respondent - Executive

Engineer, PWD, Malappuram through Ext.P5

representation; and pray that said Authority be

directed to take it up and hear them, so as to

decide whether their grievances can be allayed, as

also whether the alignment can be altered in any

manner whatsoever.

3. The learned Government Pleader, Smt.Resmitha

Ramachandran, submitted that, as far as the

alignment is concerned, it is something which is to

be decided by the competent Authorities having

technical expertise and that petitioners cannot

dictate the manner in which it has to be finalized.

She, however, submitted that if this Court is only

inclined to allow the 7th respondent to consider

Ext.P5 representation, after hearing the

petitioners, she will not stand in such way; but

prayed that this Court may not make any affirmative

declarations in their favour in this judgment.

4. When I consider the afore submissions, as

rightly stated by Smt.Resmitha Ramachandran, the

alternative proposal stated to have been made by

the petitioners through Ext.P7 is not something

which this Court can speak conclusively on, while

acting under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India, on account of the well recognized

inhibition of jurisdiction in such matters. The

best this Court can do is to allow the 7 th

respondent to consider Ext.P5 representation and

also decide whether the alternative proposal of the

petitioners is credible and worth considering.

Resultantly, I allow this writ petition to the

limited extent of directing the 7th respondent to

hear the petitioners and issue appropriate orders

on Exts.P5 and P7 representations, in terms of law,

after following due procedure.

I further clarify that, depending upon the

decision to be taken by the 7 th respondent,

petitioners will be at liberty to approach the 4th

respondent - Tahsildar for any relief on Exts.P3

and P3(a), which shall then be considered by the

said Authority in terms of law.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/1.10

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14635/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE AREA WHERE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT HAS TO TAKE PLACE.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE HE 3RD RESPONDENT BY THE LOCAL RESIDENTS DATED 25.11.2019 IS ALONG WITH THE RECEIPT SHOWING THE SUBMISSION OF THE REPRESENTATION.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10 DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM NO.10 DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF SOME OF THE RECEIPTS NOS.

EC-495/2021, EC-504/2021, EC-499/2021 DATED 13.04.2021 EVIDENCING THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPLICATIONS BY THE FATHER OF THE 2ND PETITIONER , 4TH PETITIONER AND 10TH PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 16.03.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE 7TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13.04.2021 SUBMITTED BY 2ND PETITIONER TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION EXPLAINING THE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSAL OF DEVELOPMENT OF ROAD DATED 03.07.2021 BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT BY THE PETITIONERS AND THE OTHER LOCAL RESIDENTS.