Sunday, 03, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Mohammed Ali vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 21165 Ker

Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 21165 Ker
Judgement Date : 20 October, 2021

Kerala High Court
Mohammed Ali vs State Of Kerala on 20 October, 2021
               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 28TH ASWINA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 21961 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          MOHAMMED ALI
          AGED 60 YEARS
          S/O. MOIDEEN , POOCHENGAL KUNNATH HOUSE, PANTHARANGADI
          POST, THRIKKULAM, TIRURANGADI, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN
          676 306

          SRI.K.P.SUDHEER
          SMT.ANJALI MENON



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,
          SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

    2     THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
          PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS AND BRIDGES DIVISION)
          PALAKKAD , PALAKKAD DISTRICT PIN 678 001

    3     THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
          PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT
          EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, BRIDGES DIVISION, MANAJERI,
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN 676 121

    4     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
          MALAPPURAM, COLLECTORATE, UP HILL, MALAPPURAM 676 505

          SMT. K AMMINIKUTTY - SR GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 21961 OF 2021
                                     2


                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioner singularly prays that Ext.P5 statutory

appeal, filed by him under Section 37 of the Kerala Highway

Protection Act, 1999 before the third respondent - Assistant

Executive Engineer, PWD, be directed to be taken up and

disposed of within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The petitioner explains that he has been constrained

to approach this Court the day after he preferred Ext.P5

because urgent steps were taken by the competent

Authorities to demolish the existing boundary walls and to

trespass into his property covered by Ext.P1. The petitioner

says that he was not aware of the proceedings against him

and that Ext.P5 had been preferred as soon as he came to be

aware of the same; and consequently that he could not waste

even one day in approaching this Court and seeking relief in

this writ petition.

3. The learned Senior Government Pleader,

Smt.K.Amminikutty, resisted the afore submissions, saying

that this writ petition is premature because Ext.P5 was

preferred only on 10.10.2021. She submitted that, however, if

this Court is inclined to direct the second respondent -

Executive Engineer to consider Ext.P5, then the said

Authority may be allowed to do so in terms of law, without this WP(C) NO. 21961 OF 2021

Court entering into the merits of the controversy or

answering the contentions of the petitioner affirmatively in

his favour, thus leaving the said Authority to take an apposite

decision thereon.

4. When I evaluate the afore submissions, though

normally, this Court could not have entertained this writ

petition seeking to dispose of Ext.P5, a day after it was

preferred, taking note of the rather peculiar circumstances

involved in this case, I am of the view that the petitioner is

entitled to relief.

5. Resultantly, I allow this writ petition and direct the

second respondent - Executive Engineer to take up Ext.P5

statutory appeal of the petitioner and dispose of the same,

after affording him an opportunity of being heard; thus

culminating in an appropriate decision thereon, as

expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two weeks from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Needless to say, until such time as the afore exercise is

completed and the resultant order communicated to the

petitioner, all further action pursuant to Ext.P4 shall stand

deferred.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 21961 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21961/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED DATED 28-12-1987 REGISTERED AS DOC. NO. 3007/1987 OF THIRURANGADI SRO

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF SETTLEMENT DEED DATED 11-09-

1991 REGISTERED AS DOC. NO. 2313/1991 OF THIRURANGADI SRO

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 9-2-

2021 ISSUED BY VILLAGE OFFICER, THIRURANGADI.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE NO. D1-330/2013 DATED 30-03-2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 10-10-2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDEENT.

Exhibit P6 PHOTOGRAPHS (2 NOS) OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER.

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : Smt. Nirmala Devi Bam Memorial International Moot Court Competition

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter