Roy B vs State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 6762 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
  TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 24TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                   WP(C) NO. 14589 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          ROY B.
          AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.BABU M., T.C.26/1031,
          FLAT NO.717, RAJAJI NAGAR,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST., PIN - 695 001.
          BY ADVS.
          S.JUSTUS
          V.HARI

RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
          DEPARTMENT OF LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, GOVERNMENT
          SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.
    2     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
          KUDAPPANAKUNNU P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST., PIN - 695 043.
    3     THE TAHASILDAR
          NEDUMANGAD TALUK, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST.,
          PIN - 695541.
    4     THE VILLAGE OFFICER
          VATTAPPARA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGADU, VATTAPPARA P.O.,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST., PIN - 695 028.
    5     KERALA WATER AUTHORITY
          REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR,
          'JALA BHAVAN', VELLAYAMBALAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST., PIN - 695 033.
    6     THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER
          KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, SUB DIVISION, NEDUMANGAD,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST., PIN - 695 541.
    7     KARAKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KARAKULAM,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DIST., PIN - 695 564.
          BY ADVS.SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP
          ADVOCATE GENERAL OFFICE KERALA
          GEORGIE JOHNY
          GOVIND PADMANAABHAN
          G.P.SHINOD(K/000626/1995)
 W.P.(C).No.14589/2022

                             2



           AJIT G ANJARLEKAR(K/000083/2014)
           ATUL MATHEWS(K/1675/2018)
           S.PREMJITH KUMAR(K/000309/2008)
           K.S.SHARMILA(K/817/2007)


      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 14.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.14589/2022

                                   3




                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                    --------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.14589 of 2022
             ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 14th day of June, 2022


                           JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order to direct the 7 th respondent to remove the illegal constructions on the road leading to the petitioner's property. ii. Issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order to consider the Ext.P3 complaint submitted to the 3rd respondent Tahsildar. iii. Pass such other and further orders as are deemed fit and necessary in the interests of justice.

(SIC)

2. Petitioner belongs to Scheduled Caste community.

It is stated in the writ petition that he is a person having a

physical disability of 40%. The petitioner and his wife were

granted Ext.P1 patta by the Government. It is the case of the

petitioner that the 7th respondent Panchayat started to

construct a water tank in the adjacent property of the W.P.(C).No.14589/2022

petitioner. According to the petitioner, the above said

construction blocked the way to the petitioner's property. It is

the definite case of the petitioner that it affects the ingress

and egress to the petitioner's property. The petitioner

submitted Ext.P3 complaint to the 3 rd respondent. Even then

there is no response. Hence this writ petition.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

learned Government Pleader and the learned counsel for the

7th respondent. I also heard the learned Standing Counsel for

respondents 5 and 6.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner reiterated his

contentions in the writ petition. The learned Government

Pleader takes me through paragraph 4 of the statement filed

by the 3rd respondent.

5. This Court considered the contentions of the

petitioner and the respondents. It will be better to extract

paragraph 4 of the statement filed by the 3rd respondent:

"It is respectfully submitted that the petitioner submitted an application on 12.04.2022 before the 3rd respondent stating that the 7th respondent had blocked the way to his property by constructing a water tank and he requested to inform about the way W.P.(C).No.14589/2022

to enter his property. The aforesaid application was forwarded to the 4th respondent on the same day for enquiry and report in this regard. On site inspection through the 4th respondent, it is found that the petitioner entered his property from the road using the said puramboke land. Now the 7th respondent started to construct a water tank in the said puramboke land and it blocks the ingress and egress to the petitioner's property. It is seen that the said construction works are being carried out entirely on the puramboke land which is in the possession of the 7th respondent. As per resurvey Field Measurement Sketch, no pathway is recorded for the ingress and egress to the petitioner's property. The petitioner hasn't produced any documents recording the way to his property. However, it is found that the petitioner has no other way to enter his property. It is seen that the said problem can only be resolved if the 7 th respondent or the owner of the neighbouring property comprised in Resurvey No. 399/14 provides a walkway to the petitioner's property from the road. This respondent can take a decision only after getting the version of the 7th respondent."

6. In this paragraph, it is clearly stated that the

petitioner has no other way to enter his property and this

problem can be resolved only by the 7th respondent or the

owner of the neighbouring property comprised in Re-Survey W.P.(C).No.14589/2022

No.399/14. In the light of the above statement, it is a matter

to be considered by the 7th respondent. The 7th respondent

should see that there is access to the petitioner's property.

The petitioner is free to submit a representation to the 7 th

respondent and there can be a direction to the 7 th respondent

to consider the matter after giving an opportunity of hearing

to the petitioner and other affected parties. This should be

done within a time frame.

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the

following manner:

1. The petitioner is free to file a representation

narrating his grievance raised in this writ

petition before the 7th respondent, within three

weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

2. Once such a representation is received, the 7 th

respondent will consider the same and take

appropriate steps in accordance to law to see

that there is an access to the petitioner's

property, after giving an opportunity of

hearing to the petitioner and other affected W.P.(C).No.14589/2022

parties, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within two months from the date of

receipt of the representation.

sd/-

                                       P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV                                            JUDGE
 W.P.(C).No.14589/2022





                 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14589/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1        TRUE COPY OF THE PATTA DATED

31/01/2014 ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT. Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 12/04/2022 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT TAHASILDAR.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE DISABILITY CERTIFICATE OF THE PETITIONER.