N.Ramankutty Nair vs The District Collector
2023 Latest Caselaw 12866 Ker

Kerala High Court

N.Ramankutty Nair vs The District Collector on 8 December, 2023

Author: Bechu Kurian Thomas

Bench: Bechu Kurian Thomas

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMAS
   FRIDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2023 / 17TH AGRAHAYANA, 1945
                        WP(C) NO.41271 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

          N.RAMANKUTTY NAIR, AGED 76 YEARS
          S/O.NARAYANAN NAIR, RAMANILAYAM, NO.52, MANAVEEYAM
          NAGAR DOOR NO.K.C.7/1530, KUREEPUZHA P.O. KOLLAM, PIN -
          691601
          BY ADV.T.M.CHANDRAN


RESPONDENTS:

    1     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
          COLLECTORATE, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
    2     THE SECRETARY
          KOLLAM CORPORATION, KOLLAM, PIN - 691001
    3     GIRIJA, AGED 57 YEARS
          D/O.LATE SRI.RAGHAVAN, GIRIJALAYAM, U.P.S. NAGAR,
          KUREEPUZHA.P.O. KOLLAM, PIN - 691601
    4     JAYPRAKASH
          S/O.LATE SRI.SUKUMARAN, GIRIJALAYAM, U.P.S.NAGAR,
          KUREEPUZHA.P.O., KOLLAM, PIN - 691601


          BY SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY, SR.GOVERNMENT PLEADER
             SRI.S.SREEKUMAR [KOLLAM], SC



     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
08.12.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO.41271 OF 2023                      2




                    BECHU KURIAN THOMAS, J.
              ========================
                     W.P.(C)No.41271 of 2023
              ------------------------------------------------
                         Dated this the 8th day of December 2023

                                    JUDGMENT

Alleging that a water way (thodu) near the property of the

petitioner had been filled up and a building has been constructed over

the thodu without a valid permit by respondents 3 and 4, a complaint

was filed as per Ext.P1 before respondents 1 and 2. The limited relief

sought for by the petitioner is for a direction to consider Ext.P1

complaint by the 2nd respondent in a time bound manner.

2. Having heard Sri.T.M.Chandran, learned Counsel for the

petitioner as well as the Sri.S.Sreekumar, learned Standing Counsel for

the Panchayat, I am of the view that the writ petition can be disposed of

with a direction. Considering the nature of order that I propose to issue,

notice to respondents 3 and 4 is dispensed with.

3. Since Ext.P1 complaint seeking restoration of the thodu and the

alleged unauthorised construction by respondents 3 and 4 is pending, it

is necessary that a time bound decision be taken by the 2nd respondent.

4. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the 2 nd respondent to

consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P1 complaint, as

expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of 60 days from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after granting an

opportunity of hearing to the petitioner as well as to respondents

3 and 4.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jm/

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41271/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P 1 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12-10-2023 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS AND OTHERS