Kerala High Court
C.S.Sukumaran vs Kumbalam Grama Panchayat on 6 February, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
WP(C) NO. 18729 OF 2014 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2024 / 17TH MAGHA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 18729 OF 2014
PETITIONER/S:
C.S.SUKUMARAN
S/O.SHANKU,'CHENGANATTU"
HOUSE,MUNDEMPALLI,PANANGADP.O,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682
506
BY ADVS.
SRI.K.SHRIHARI RAO
SMT.N.SHOBHA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 KUMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT
REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT,PANANGAD P.O,ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT 682 506
2 THE SECRETARY
KUMBALAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT,PANANGAD P.O,ERNAKULAM
DISTRICT 682 506
3 V.A SHAHUL HAMEED
S/O.VATHAPALLY ABDUL KHADER,VATHAP[ALLY
HOUSE,PANANGAD P.O,MADAVANA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT 682
506
BY ADVS.
S.SHANAVAS KHAN
SRI.AJITH GEORGE
SRI.A.P.SUBHASH, ADV.P.T.MATHEW
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
06.02.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 18729 OF 2014 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
---------------------------------------
W.P.(C.) No.18729 of 2014
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 6th day of February, 2024
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :
"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ
order or direction directing the respondents 1 and 2 to clear the
Karikkal Road in the 9th ward (now in the 12th ward) of the 1st
respondent Panchayat for use to the petitioner and others by
removing the obstruction cause by the 3 rd respondent by
constructing a compound wall in the road.
(ii) Issue appropriate direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to
pay the amount spend by the petitioner that is Rs.3,00,000/-
with interest from 2004 onwards till the date of payment @18%
p.a. for constructing the Karikkal Road.
(iii) Issue appropriate direction to the respondents to pay a
reasonable compensation to petitioner for the loss, mental
agony caused to the petitioner because of the action of the 3 rd
respondent with support of the respondents 1 and 2.
(iv) Issue appropriate direction to the respondents 1 and 2 to
initiate prosecution proceedings against the 3rd respondent
invoking their powers under Sec. 220 of the Kerala Panchayat
Raj Act, 1994
(v) Pass such other orders deemed fit in the facts and
circumstances of the case.
(v) Grant the petitioner the costs of the Writ Petition (Civil)."
[sic]
2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action of the
respondent Nos. 1 to 3 obstructing the Karikkal road leading to
the residence of the petitioner by constructing a compound wall
in the road. According to the petitioner, the above road is a
public road belongs to the 1st respondent-Panchayat. According
to the petitioner, even though there is a clear cut finding of the
illegal action of the 3rd respondent, the Panchayat is not taking
any action is the grievance. Hence, this writ petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the
learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat. I also heard the
learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent.
4. A counter affidavit is filed by the 1 st and 2nd
respondents and also the 3rd respondent. It will be better to
extract the relevant portion of the counter affidavit filed by
respondent Nos. 1 and 2.
"The allegations contained in paragraph Nos. 2 and 3 of the
W.P.(C.) are not fully correct and hence denied. It is submitted
that these respondents could not trace any documents
pertaining to the alleged formation of a road during 2003-04 at
their office. The petitioner has also not produced any material
on record to prove that he has spent money as claimed in the
above W.P.(C.) or otherwise for the formation of Karikkal Road.
It is submitted that even though a road by name Karikkal Road
is in existence, such a road is not included in the Asset Register
maintained by the 1st respondent panchayat. However,
proceedings are initiated to include the said road in the Asset
Register of the 1st respondent. therefore, the 1st respondent
cannot be made responsible for taking legal action against the
illegal activities of the 3rd respondent since Karikkal Road
legally vests with the 1st respondent. Hence the allegations in
the above W.P.(C.) that the alleged Karikkal Road was formed in
the year 2004, that the petitioner together with other residents
of the locality paid a sum of Rs.5,00,00/- for its formation, that it
has a length of 175 metres and width of 4 meters etc. are
denied by these respondents."
5. From the above, it is clear that the Karikkal road is
not included in the asset register maintained by the 1 st
respondent-Panchayat. It is true that the Panchayat stated in
the counter that the proceedings are initiated to include the
said road in the asset register of the 1 st respondent. But, as on
the date of filing the counter affidavit, the road is not included
in the asset register. If that is the case, the Panchayat has no
right to initiate proceedings against the 3 rd respondent. The
counsel for the petitioner relied Ext.P9 report. Ext.P9 report
also would not show that the road is included in the asset
register so that the the Panchayat can take action against the
3rd respondent. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that
the 1st and 2nd respondents may not be able to take appropriate
action against the 3rd respondent, if there is any obstruction to
the Karikkal road leading to the residence of the petitioner. If
that is the case, the petitioner has to approach the civil court to
redress the grievance.
Therefore, this writ petition is closed, granting liberty to
the petitioner to approach the civil court to redress the
grievance. All the contentions raised by the petitioner in this
writ petition are left open.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
SKS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18729/2014
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
Exhibit R1(a) A true copy of the report submitted by this
respondent in C.M.P.No.214/2016 in
O.P.No.1123/2013 dated 13.12.2018
Exhibit R1(b) A true copy of the order of the Hon'ble
Ombudsman for Local Self Government
Institutions dated 02.08.2019
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P9 COPY OF THE FORWARDING LETTER
DATED 8-7-2014 OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE SUB
COMMITTEE FORMED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT WITH
REPORT ADDRESSED TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P10 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 16-10-
2004 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P11 COPY OF THE ENQUIRY REPORT
DATED 10-02-2013 OF THE THEN PRESIDENT OF
THE 1ST RESPONDENT REGARDING THE CASE OF
THE PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14-
02-2012 IN WPC NO 32897/04 OF THIS HON'BLE
COURT
EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF COPY OF THE
REPRESENTATION DATED 23-2-2012 OF THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE REGISTERED LETTER
DATED 23-05-2014 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO
THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT 4 COPY OF THE COPY OF THE OP N
1123/13 DATED 15-06-2013 FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN FOR
LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
INSTITUTIONS,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 27-
11-2013 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE
HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN IN OP NO 1123/2013
EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 29-11-
2013 IN OP NO 1123/13 OF THE HON'BLE
OMBUDSMAN
EXHIBIT P20. TRUE COPY OF THE G.O. DATED 11.09.2015
ISSUED BY THE GOVERNMENT OF KERALA.
EXHIBIT P21. TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 05.10.2017 OF
THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, HARBOUR
ENGINEERING, ERNAKULAM DIVISION.
EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE COPY OF THE LETTER
DATED 25-3-2013 OF THE THEN PRESIDENT OF
THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P8 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21-06-
2014 SUBMITTED BY ONE HASSAN BEFORE THE
PRESIDENT OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN A STAMP
PAPER
