Ushakumari vs Chithara Grama Panchayat ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 8564 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
     WEDNESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1944
                        WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013
PETITIONER:

    1     USHAKUMARI
          AGED 57 YEARS
          W/O SURENDRAN, RESHMA BHAVAN, UNNIMUKKU,
          CHITHARA VILLAGE, PIN:691 559.
    2     SURENDRAN
          AGED 63 YEARS
          S/O KUNCHU, RESHMA BHAVAN, UNNIMUKKU,
          CHITHARA VILLAGE, PIN:691 559.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF
          SRI.A.MOHAMED RASHEED


RESPONDENTS:

    1     CHITHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT (SPECIAL GRADE)
          CHITHARA P.O., KOLLAM-691 559, REPRESENTED BY ITS
          SECRETARY.
    2     SECRETARY SPECIAL GRADE
          CHITHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT (SPECIAL GRADE),
          CHITHARA P.O., KOLLAM-691 559.
    3     VILLAGE OFFICER
          CHITHARA VILLAGE, CHITHARA-691 559.
          BY ADVS.
          SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR
          SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD
          SRI.P.MOHANDAS ERNAKULAM
          DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SR.
          SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN
          SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013
                                    2


                P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
               ------------------------------
              W.P.(C).No. 31995 of 2013
       ----------------------------------------------
         Dated this the 06th day of July, 2022


                           JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with the following

prayers:

"(i) To call for the records relating to Ext.P-1 to P-5 and to issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P-4 notice and further proceedings;

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding the Respondents 1 and 2 not to cause any obstruction in the construction of compound wall by the Petitioners in their property covered by Exts.P-1 and P-2 documents;

(iii) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding the 2nd Respondent to measure out the width of the road stated in Ext.P-4 notice based upon the records maintained in the Panchayath and Village Offices including the Roads Register of Panchayat wherein the width of the Road is stated and to fix the boundary accordingly at the north side of the Petitioner's property adjoining to the Panchayat Road;

(iv) Any other appropriate, writ, order or direction also may be granted to meet out justice under the circumstances of the above case."[SIC] WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013

2. This writ petition is filed mainly challenging

Ext.P4 order by which the 1 st respondent Panchayath

directed the petitioners to demolish an unauthorized

construction made by the petitioners encroaching the

Panchayath road. The petitioners submitted Ext.P5 reply

to the Panchayath. Thereafter this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard counsel appearing for the petitioners

and the learned Government Pleader.

4. This Court perused Ext.P4 notice issued by the

Panchayath. According to the Panchayath there is

encroachment. According to the petitioners, there is no

encroachment. If that is the case, this can be easily find

out by conducting a survey of the property of the

petitioner and the road. The Panchayath can peruse the

relevant documents. Ext.P6 is the location sketch

showing the property of the petitioner and the road.

Perusing these documents, the Panchayath can easily

find out whether there is any encroachment or not. As I

stated earlier, the petitioner already submitted Ext.P5

explanation. But the petitioner is free to submit an WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013

additional representation also, producing additional

documents, if any. For facilitating the Panchayath to

pass fresh orders, Ext.P4 can be set aside.

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the

following manner:

            i.      Ext.P4 is set aside.

            ii.     The 1st and 2nd respondents are directed to

reconsider the matter after giving an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner.

iii. The 1st and 2nd respondents will conduct a

survey and verify all documents available before

deciding the matter.

iv. The petitioner is free to file an additional

representation also producing additional documents, if

any.

v. The status quo as on today will be

maintained till final orders are passed by respondents 1

and 2.

Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN DM JUDGE WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31995/2013

PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF TH ESALE DEED NO.2011/2011 DATED 12.8.2011. EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.1328021 DATED 10.5.2013.

                  EXHIBIT    P3:    TRUE   COPY    OF   THE
                  CERTIFICATE     JNO.A3-6527/2013    DATED
                  11.10.2013     ISSUED    BY    THE    2ND
                  RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.730/13 DATED 12.11.2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 10.12.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE