Rajamma Leelu Thankachan vs Deputy Superintendent Of Police
2023 Latest Caselaw 2050 Ker

         IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  FRIDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF FEBRUARY 2023 / 14TH MAGHA, 1944
                     WP(C) NO. 1642 OF 2023
PETITIONER:

         RAJAMMA LEELU THANKACHAN
         AGED 74 YEARS, W/O THANKACHEN V.SAMUAL
         LEETHASH,SASTHAMCOTTA P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT-690521

         BY ADV ATHIRA A.MENON


RESPONDENTS:

    1    DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE
         SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION
         SASTHAMCOTTA,KOLLAM-690521
    2    THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER
         SASTHAMCOTTA POLICE STATION
         SASTHAMCOTTA,KOLLAM-690521
    3    SASTHAMCOTTA GRAMA PANCHAYATH
         REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY
         SASTHAMCOTTA ,KOLLAM -690521
    4    SAIJU KOSHY, S/O KOSHY,'ANJANAM'
         SANKARAMANGALAM COMPOUND
         SASTHAMCOTTA P.O,KOLLAM-690521
    5    SASIKUMAR P, S/O PRABHAKARAN PILLAI ,
         'NIRANJANAM' SANKARAMANGALAM COMPOUND
         SASTHAMCOTTA P.O, KOLLAM-690521

         BY ADVS.
         S.SREEKUMAR (KOLLAM)
         K.VIJAYAN(K/000868/2015)
         SRI.E.C. BINEESH GP


     THIS WRIT PETITION       (CIVIL) HAVING    COME UP   FOR
ADMISSION ON 03.02.2023,      THE COURT ON     THE SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) No.1642 of 2023

                               2




                           JUDGMENT

Dated this the 3rd day of February, 2023

The petitioner is owner of a building, which has been

rented out to Indian Bank. The Bank required the petitioner to

construct a ramp so as to make the building disabled friendly.

2. The petitioner states that she has approached the

Panchayat authorities and obtained a Building Permit.

Permission has been granted to the petitioner as per Exts.P10

and P11.

3. The petitioner states that respondents 4 and 5 are

unnecessarily interfering in the construction of the ramp and

physically preventing the construction.

4. Counsel for respondents 4 and 5 submitted that

respondents 4 and 5 have no objection in constructing ramp in

the property belonging to the petitioner. However, the attempt

of the petitioner is to construct the ramp extending to the road WP(C) No.1642 of 2023

encroaching public property. This cannot be permitted.

5. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner,

the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1

and 2 and the learned counsel for respondents 4 and 5.

6. Going through the pleadings in the writ petition, it is

evident that the Bank authorities to whom the petitioner has

leased out the building require construction of a ramp to make

the building disabled friendly, as per the norms prescribed by

public authorities. The petitioner has obtained permission for

construction of the ramp. If the ramp is constructed as per the

permission granted by the Grama Panchayat, respondents 4

and 5 cannot legitimately make any objection to such

construction.

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of

directing respondents 1 and 2 to grant effective protection to

the petitioner for construction of ramp to the building in

question strictly in accordance with the Building Permit issued

by the Grama Panchayat. If respondents 4 and 5 are WP(C) No.1642 of 2023

aggrieved by the construction, they may approach the

appropriate authorities including the Grama Panchayat for

redressal of their grievance.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk WP(C) No.1642 of 2023

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1642/2023

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP AND POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER AND HER HUSBAND Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR DATED 21-05-

2014 ISSUED BY THE PRINCIPAL CHIEF GENERAL MANAGER, RESERVE BANK OF INDIA Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 4-02-

2019 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYATH Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 5-02-2019 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYATH Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 08-03-2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND BEFORE THE PANCHAYATH Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 13-05-

2019 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYATH Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18-06-

2019 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYATH Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 15-06-

2022 IN WRIT PETITION NO.17057 OF 2019 Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER IN REVIEW PETITION NO.753/2022 DATED 12.08.2022 Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE PANCHAYATH DATED 08-11-2022 TAKEN BY THE PANCHAYATH Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT GIVEN BY THE PANCHAYATH DATED 09-11-2022 TAKEN BY THE PANCHAYATH Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 09-

11-2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT Exhibit P13 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 11-

11-2022 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER'S HUSBAND BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT