Anilkumar K.K vs The Station House Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 19974 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 2ND ASWINA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          ANILKUMAR K.K., AGED 55 YEARS, S/O. KRISHNAN,
          KAMMALA HOUSE, VELOOR KARA, PUTHENCRUZE VILLAGE,
          PUTHENCRUZE P.O, 682 308.

          BY ADVS. SHIBU JOSEPH
          SRI.RONALD PAUL
          SRI.AJITH VISWANATHAN
          SHRI.V.C. XAVIER


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, AMBALAMEDU POLICE STATION,
          ERNAKULAM, PIN CODE - 682 303.

    2     VINOJ P.C, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. CHOTHY P.A,
          PULICKAYATH HOUSE, VELLOR KARA, KARIMUKAL, PUTHENCRUZE
          VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 682 303.

    3     ANILKUMAR P.C, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. CHOTHY P.A,
          PULICKAYATH HOUSE, VELLOR KARA, KARIMUKAL, PUTHENCRUZE
          VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 682 303.

    4     ANOOP RAJ, AGED 30 YEARS, S/O. RAJU M.A, MOOLEKUZHI
          HOUSE, VELLOR KARA, KARIMUKAL PUTHENCRUZE VILLAGE,
          ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE - 682 303.

    5     KUNJUMON P.P, AGED 50 YEARS, S/O. PALLIYAN, PULIKKAYATH
          HOUSE, PALEKUZHI, VELLOR KARA, KARIMUKAL, PUTHENCRUZE
          VILLAGE, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN CODE 682 303.

 *ADDL.R6 TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, PERUMBAVOOR.

          BY ADVS.SMT. M.CHANDRALEKHA
          SMT. K.AMMINIKUTTY - SR. GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021
                                   -2-




                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who claims to be the owner of

certain extents of land in Puthencruz Village, has

approached this Court saying that when he tried to

construct a compound wall on the boundary of the

same, he and his employees are being obstructed by

respondents 2 to 5.

2. The petitioner says that he, thereafter,

approached the Munsiff's Court, Perumbavoor,

through O.S.No.344 of 2020 and obtained an order

of injunction dated 14.09.2020 against the

respondents from trespassing into the property;

but that, in spite of this, they are continuing

with their obstructionist activities, thus

preventing him from enjoying his property legally.

3. The petitioner says he was thus forced to

approach the 1st respondent - Station House Officer WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

(SHO) through Ext.P10 complaint, seeking

protection; but that since no action was taken

thereon, he has been constrained to approach this

Court by filing this writ petitioner. He,

therefore, prays that the 1st respondent be

directed to afford him and his employees effective

and adequate protection for construction of

compound wall as per Ext.P8 sketch, which he says

has been prepared by the Taluk Surveyor,

Kunnathunadu.

4. The afore submissions made on behalf of

the petitioner by Sri.Shibu Joseph - his learned

counsel, were vehemently opposed by

Smt.M.Chandralekha - learned counsel appearing for

the party respondents, relying on the averments

made in the counter affidavit filed in this case.

She pointed out that the residents of the Colony,

where the petitioner's property is situated, have

filed several complaints with respect to his WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

conduct in having encroached into public land and,

particularly that which belongs to the 'Periyar

Valley Irrigation Project' (PVIP). She then

alleged that the petitioner, with the help of

Ext.P7(a) injunction order, has now started

construction of a compound wall violating all the

applicable Rules.

5. Smt.M.Chandralekha further explained that

the Colony in question has about 50 houses and

that there is a road which leads to it, as also a

famous temple, called 'Pulickayath Temple'. She

asserted that the attempt of the petitioner is to

construct a compound wall without leaving the

space prescribed by the Rules and very close to

the 'Periyar Valley Canal Bund'; and contended

that if this construction is allowed, then the

residents of the colony will have no access to the

aforementioned temple. She further pointed out

that being aware of these aspects, the Assistant WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

Engineer, PVIP, has already notified the competent

Tahsildar through Exts.R2(b) and R2(c),

recommending that the petitioner be interdicted

from making such construction. She, therefore,

prayed that this writ petition be dismissed.

6. The learned Government Pleader -

Sri.E.C.Bineesh, submitted that, as is evident

from the afore rival positions, the disputes

between the parties are in the realm of Civil law

and that the Police cannot intervene into the

same. He submitted that, however, the Police have

ensured that law and order is maintained in the

area in question and that no breach of peace has

been allowed to be committed by either of the

rival parties.

7. When I examine the afore submissions from

the touchstone of the various documents available

on record, it becomes indubitable that the

petitioner is claiming a right to construct WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

compound wall around his property on the strength

of Ext.P7(a) order of injunction, obtained by him

from the Munsiff's Court on 14.08.2020. He

maintains that he is entitled to make a

construction, not merely on the strength of this

order, but also on Ext.P8 Survey Sketch, wherein,

his property has been clearly shown to be within

the confines of his title document.

8. On the contrary, the party respondents say

that the petitioner is actually trespassing into

the property belonging to the PVIP, and that the

Assistant Engineer of the said project has already

notified the Tahsildar against it, as per

Exts.R2(b) and R2(c). They say that if the

construction as proposed by the petitioner is now

allowed, the access to their Colony and the temple

would be lost for ever.

9. Thus, as rightly stated by

Sri.E.C.Bineesh, the disputes between the parties WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

are squarely in the realm of Civil Law. It would

not be possible for this Court, while acting under

Article 226 of the Constitution of India, to enter

into the same on on its merits, in any manner

whatsoever. The sole obligation of this Court

under the constitution is to ensure that law and

order is maintained in the area in question and

that the disputes between the parties do not

spillover and create breach of peace.

10. That said, I notice that Exts.R2(b) and

R2(c) are stated to have been issued by the

Assistant Engineer, PVIP to the competent

Tahsildar; and am, therefore, of the firm view

that the said Authority will need to look into the

same, after hearing both sides and then finally

take a decision whether the petitioner can be

allowed to make any construction, as now proposed

by him, on the strength of Ext.P7(a) order and

Ext.P8 survey sketch.

WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

Resultantly, I order this writ petition and

direct the 6th respondent - Tahsildar, to

immediately hear the petitioner and the party

respondents - either physically or through video

conferencing - and take a decision on the

recommendations made by the Assistant Engineer,

PVIP, in Exts.R2(b) and R2(c) and to issue an

apposite order thereon.

For the afore purpose, the parties will appear

before the said Authority at 11 AM on 30.09.2021,

who will thereafter assess the rival positions and

take a decision as ordered above, within a period

of one week thereafter.

Needless to say, whatever be the outcome of

the afore exercise, the Police Authority will

ensure that the parties are not allowed to take

law into their own hands or to commit any act

contrary to law.

It also goes without saying that if the WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

Tahsildar is to find in favour of the petitioner,

then he will be at full liberty to make the

construction on the strength of Ext.P7(a) order

and Ext.P8 survey sketch; however, all the rights

to agitate against the same being left open to the

party respondents, as per law and as they may be

advised.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE akv WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11142/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO 4988 OF 2019 DATED 25-10-2019.

EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE RECEIPT OF FEE ISSUED BY THE VADAVUCODE- PUTHENCRUZ GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 20-05-

EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 17-07-2020 ISSUED BY THE VADAVUCODE-PUTHENCRUZ GRAMA PANCHAYAT

EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE CORRECTION DEED NO. 2724 OF 2020 OF SRO PUTHENCRUZ

EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 07-09-2020

EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 12-10-2020 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY VADAVUCODE-PUTHENCRUZ GRAMA PANCHAYAT

EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE PLAINT IN O.S NO. 344 OF 2020 ON THE FILES OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, PERUMBAVOOR.

EXHIBIT P7 A THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 14-09-2020 PASSED IN I.A NO. 1 OF 2020 IN O.S NO. 344 OF 2020 ON THE FILES OF MUNSIFF'S COURT, PERUMBAVOOR

EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE SKETCH ISSUED BY THE TALUK SURVEYOR

EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER GIVEN WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

TO THE SECRETARY VADAVUCODE-PUTHENCRUZ GRAMA PANCHAYAT ON 26-03-2021

EXHIBIT P10 THE TRUE PHOTOSTAT COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS :

EXHIBIT R2(a) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE MASS PETITION DATED 12.3.2018 TO THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, SECTION 2/7, PVIP KOLENCHERRY.

EXHIBIT R2(b) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 24.4.2018 OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PVIP SECTION 2/7 KOLENCHERRY TO THE TAHSILDAR.

EXHIBIT R2(c) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.8.2019 OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, PVIP SECTION 2/7 KOLENCHERRY TO THE TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK.

EXHIBIT R2(d1) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 8.10.2020 BEFORE THE KUNNATHUNADU MLA VP SAJEENDRAN.

EXHIBIT R2(d2) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINTED DATED 8.10.2020 TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, THE MINISTER FOR SC-ST AND TO THE PERIYAR VALLEY OFFICE, KOLENCHERRY.

EXHIBIT R2(e) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 9.10.2020 TO THE OFFICER, DISTRICT SCHEDULE CASTE DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ERNAKULAM, KAKKANAD.

EXHIBIT R2(f) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE WRITTEN STATEMENT FILED IN O.S.344/2020 BEFORE THE MUSIFF COURT, PERUMBAVOOR.

EXHIBIT R2(g) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION WP(C) NO. 11142 OF 2021

DATED 6.2.2021 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE HONOURABLE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA.

EXHIBIT R2(h) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11.2.2021 ISSUED BY SURVEY VIGILANCE OFFICER TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM.

EXHIBIT R2(i) THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.3.2021 TO THE TAHSILDAR, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK.

EXHIBIT R2(j) THE PHOTOS DATED 15.9.2021 SHOWING THE ENCROACHMENT OF THE PETITIONER.

//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE