Kerala High Court
Mary Mount Public School vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 15069 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
MARY MOUNT PUBLIC SCHOOL
KATTACHIRA P. O., KOTTAYAM, KERALA - 686572,
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRINCIPAL.
BY ADVS.
SANTHOSH MATHEW
ARUN THOMAS
ANIL SEBASTIAN PULICKEL
JENNIS STEPHEN
JAISY ELZA JOE
KARTHIKA MARIA
SANITA SABU VARGHESE
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695
001.
2 THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
3 THE CHIEF ENGINEER (ROADS)
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, PUBLIC OFFICE COMPLEX,
MUSEUM P. O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695033.
4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE, COLLECTORATE P. O., KOTTAYAM, PIN -
686 002.
5 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
COLLECTORATE P. O., KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686 002.
6 THE TAHSILDAR (LR)
COLLECTORATE P. O., KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686 002.
wp(c) 15069/2021 2
7 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
ETTUMANOOR VILLAGE, ETTUMANNOOR P. O., KOTTAYAM
DISTRICT, PIN - 686 631.
8 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ROAD DIVISION, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686 001.
9 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, ROAD DIVISION, KOTTAYAM,
PIN - 686 001.
10 AJI THOMAS
AGED 39 YEARS, S/O. P. M. THOMAS, PAMELAYIL (H),
COLLECTORATE P. O., KOTTAYAM - 686 002.
11 AJI
AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. RAGHAVAN, ALUMTHARAYIL,
PANAMPALAM, ARPOOKARA, KOTTAYAM - 686 008.
SMT. AMMINIKUTTY - SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 23.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
wp(c) 15069/2021 3
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
===========================
WP(c)No.15069 of 2021
===========================
Dated this the 23rd day of September, 2021
JUDGMENT
The petitioner, which is stated to be a School, has approached this
Court impugning Ext.P9 notice issued to them by the eighth respondent -
Executive Engineer, asking them to remove an arch installed by them in a
"puramboke area", alleging that it violates the provisions of the Land
Conservancy Act.
2. The petitioner states that Ext.P9 cannot be now acted upon
because, after it had been issued, Ext.P11 recommendation has been
made by the Chief Engineer (PWD) - within whose territory the School is
situated - through Ext.P11, to the Government, recommending that the
petitioner's arch be not immediately removed, on condition that an
undertaking be taken from them that they will demolish and remove it,
as and when it is required for the development of the road. The
petitioner says that Ext.P9, therefore, cannot be allowed to operate any
further and prays that the same be set aside.
3. I have heard Smt.Jaisy Elza Joe, the learned counsel for the
petitioner and Smt.K.Amminikutty learned Senior Government Pleader
appearing for the official respondents.
4. Smt.K.Amminikutty affirmed that, pending this lis, Ext.P11
recommendation dated 30.7.2021 had been issued by the Chief Engineer
to the Secretary to Government (PWD) and that necessary action
thereon is still pending before the said authority. She submitted that the
Secretary (PWD) shall, therefore, consider the recommendation made by
the Chief Engineer and issue an appropriate order thereon without any
further delay. She then added that, based on Ext.P11 recommendation, a
hearing was conducted by Government, which was evident from Ext.P12.
5. Taking note of the afore submissions and since Ext.P11 has been
issued by the Chief Engineer to the Government much after Ext.P9
notice, I deem it appropriate to allow this writ petition as under:
6. Resultantly, Ext.P9 will stand quashed; with liberty being
reserved to the second respondent - Secretary to Government to issue
appropriate orders based on Ext.P11 recommendation of the Chief
Engineer, adverting to the minutes of the hearing conducted pursuant
thereto; thus culminating in an appropriate order, as expeditiously as is
possible.
Needless to say, until such time as the afore exercise is completed
and the resultant order is communicated to the petitioner, all further
action for removal of the arch shall remain deferred.
This Writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN,
JUDGE
lgk
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXTS.
EXT.P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 5-7-2019 ISSUED BY 8TH
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P2 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 20-09-2020 SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER TO THE MINISTER FOR PUBLIC WORKS.
EXT.P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 15-10-2020 WITH
THE SITE PLAN, OLD AND PROPOSED ARCH SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE MINISTER FOR PUBLIC WORKS.
EXT.P4 PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PETITIONER SCHOOL'S ARCH.
EXT.P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT PETITION NO.24225/2020
OF THIS COURT.
EXT.P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 07-01-2021
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 8TH
RESPONDENT ALONG WITH THE COPY OF EXT.P2.
EXT.P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 01-02-2021 IN REVIEW
PETITION NO.75/2021 IN WP(C) NO.24225/2020 OF THIS COURT.
EXT.P7(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 01-02-2021 TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT.
EXT.P8 TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 11-02-2021 SENT
BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXT.P9 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 26-07-2021 ISSUED BY THE 8TH
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.
EXT.P10 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 26-07-2021 SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE ETTUMANOOR MUNICIPALITY.
EXT.P11 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30-07-2021 ISSUED BY THE
3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 03-08-2021 SUBMITTED BY
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER.
