Kerala High Court
Baby. R vs The State Of Kerala Represented The ... on 23 May, 2024
Author: Devan Ramachandran
Bench: Devan Ramachandran
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF MAY 2024 / 2ND JYAISHTA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 42029 OF 2023
PETITIONERS:
1 BABY. R, AGED 71 YEARS, S/O. ABRAHAM,
KALLUMPURATHU VEEDU, PANAVELI P.O.,
VETTIKKAVALA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691532.
2 KUNJUMOL, AGED 59 YEARS, W/O. BABY. R,
KALLUMPURATHU VEEDU, PANAVELI P.O.,
VETTIKKAVALA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691532.
BY ADV V.S.THOSHIN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED THE SECRETARY
HOME DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001.
2 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM RURAL
KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM DISTRICT, PIN - 691001.
3 THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE,
KOTTARAKKARA POLICE STATION,
KOLLAM ROAD, CHANDAMUKKU,
KOTTARAKKARA, KOLLAM, PIN - 691506.
4 MANOJ@ KEEPER MANOJ, AGED 43 YEARS,
S/O. RAVEENDRAN, REVEENDRA VILASOM,
KANNAMKODE MURI, VETTIKAVALA VILLAGE,
KOLLAM, PIN - 691532.
SMT.REKHA C.NAIR, SR.G.P.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.05.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 42029 OF 2023
-2-
JUDGMENT
The petitioners say that they are the owners
of 32 Ares of land comprised of in
Re.Sy.No.359/27 in Block No.20 of Vettikavala
Village, Kottarakkara Taluk, Kollam District;
and have produced Exts.P1 and P2 in
substantiation.
2. The petitioners explain that they have
obtained a valid building permit from
Vettikavala Grama Panchayat, namely Ext.P3, for
the construction of their house; and that, for
the purpose of levelling the land, they have
obtained Exts.P4 and P5 permissions from the
competent Geologist and Geology Department
respectively, permitting removal of ordinary
earth. They allege that the 4th respondent,
however, obstructed the work and parked two
tipper lorries, blocking entry into their
WP(C) NO. 42029 OF 2023
property, as also assaulted their labourers;
thus leaving them no other option, but to
approach the 2nd respondent seeking protection.
They submit that, however, since the Police have
not acted upon the same, they have been forced
to approach this Court through this Writ
Petition.
2. The endorsements on file reveal that
the 4th respondent has been validly served
summons from this Court. He has, however, chosen
not to be present in person, or to be
represented through counsel; thus inferentially
guiding me to the impression that he has nothing
to offer in opposition to the reliefs claimed by
the petitioners in this Writ Petition.
3. Sri.V.S.Thoshin - learned counsel for
the petitioners, explained that, even though the
4th respondent has attempted a Suit against her
clients, along with an application for interim
WP(C) NO. 42029 OF 2023
injunction, the same has been dismissed; and
therefore, that there is nothing in his aid to
make any obstruction to the construction now
being carried on by her clients. She, therefore,
reiteratingly prayed that the reliefs sought for
in this Writ Petition be granted.
4. Smt.Rekha C.Nair - learned Senior
Government Pleader, submitted that the Police
have also been informed that there is a Suit
filed by the 4th respondent against the
petitioners; but added that she does not have
instructions as to whether there are any interim
orders issued by the Civil Court. She added
that, therefore, the Police will abide by any
direction to be issued by this Court.
5. When I evaluate and consider the afore
rival submissions, it becomes luculent that, as
of now, nothing has been shown by the 4th
respondent to claim any right to cause
WP(C) NO. 42029 OF 2023
obstruction to the work being carried on by the
petitioners, especially when they maintain that
they are doing so on the strength of all valid
permits and licences. The Police also do not
have any case to the contrary, except saying
that they have some information that a Civil
Suit has been attempted by the said respondent
against the petitioners.
6. However, since no document has been
produced before this Court to indicate that the
petitioners are interdicted legally in
continuing with the work, I see no reason why
the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition be
not granted.
7. That said, however, it is not the
province of the Police to oversee the
construction, but solely that law and order is
maintained and that no one causes any violence
or physical obstruction to any activity of the
WP(C) NO. 42029 OF 2023
petitioners; though the remedy of the 4th
respondent through legal processes may certainly
be available.
In the afore circumstances, I allow this
Writ Petition and direct the 3rd respondent to
offer necessary and adequate protection to the
petitioners and their labourers to carry on and
complete the construction, as long as they act
in terms of law and on the strength of all valid
and necessary licences.
As far as the 4th respondent is concerned,
his right to invoke and pursue remedies before
any competent Forum is left open; for which
purpose, the rival contentions in that regard
are left undecided.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
akv
WP(C) NO. 42029 OF 2023
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 42029/2023
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P 1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
OF THE PROPERTY
EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION
CERTIFICATE OF THE LAND OF PETITIONERS
EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE SITE APPROVAL AND
BUILDING PERMIT NO. SC2-BA(19713)/2023
DATED 18/01/2023 ISSUED BY THE
VETTIKAVALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH
EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT ISSUED
FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF MINING AND
GEOLOGY DISTRICT OFFICE, KOLLAM DATED
30/11/2023
EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY
THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, KSEB TO THE
GEOLOGY DEPARTMENT
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXT.R4(A) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY
THE 4TH RESPONDENT AND OTHERS BEFORE
THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM ON
4.12.2023
EXT.R4(B) THE TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM
INJUNCTION ORDER PASSED IN IA
NO.1/2023 IN OS NO.599/2023 PASSED BY
THE HON'BLE MUNSIFF COURT, KOTTARAKARA
DATED 7.12.2023
