K.J.Mary vs The Ombudsman For Local Self Government ...
2024 Latest Caselaw 13742 Ker

Kerala High Court

K.J.Mary vs The Ombudsman For Local Self Government ... on 28 May, 2024

           IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                            PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM
    TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MAY 2024 / 7TH JYAISHTA, 1946


                    WP(C) NO. 11553 OF 2019
PETITIONER/S:

          K.J.MARY
          AGED 68 YEARS
          W/O.LAWRENCE, VENGANATH HOUSE, 35/1761 A, SMART
          AVENUE LANE, SOUTH JANATHA ROAD, PALARIVATTOM P.O.,
          KOCHI- 682025.

          BY ADVS.
          S.SHANAVAS KHAN
          S.INDU



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT
          INSTITUTIONS,
          SAPHALYAM COMPLEX, 4TH FLOOR, TREEDA BUILDING,
          THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695001.

    2     THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN,
          CORPORATION BUILDING, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
          KOCHI- 682011.

    3     THE SECRETARY,
          CORPORATION OF COCHIN, CORPORATION BUILDING, KOCHI-
          682011.

    4     THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
          CORPORATION OF COCHIN, ZONAL OFFICE, EDAPPALLY,
          KOCHI- 682025.

    5     L.G.ANTONY,
          LANTHAPARAMBIL HOUSE, PROVINCE ROAD, KOCHI- 682025.
 W.P.(C)No.11553 OF 2019

                                      2




      6       ADDL.R6.
              C.M.ROBIN
              AGED 54 YEARS
              S/O MICHEAL, CHETTIPARAMBIL HOUSE, 39/2551,
              PALARIVATTOM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT
              IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 04.06.2019 IN
              IA.NO.1/19 IN W.P.(C) 11553/19.

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.PRAVEEN K.JOY,SC,COCHIN CORPORATION
              SRI.G.HARIHARAN
              J.OM PRAKASH
              SRI.PRAVEEN.H.
              SMT.K.S.SMITHA
              SMT.T.T.SHANIBA
              SRI.M.V.VIPINDAS
              SHRI.AMAL DEV D



OTHER PRESENT:

              SRI.V.VENUGOPAL-GP




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28.05.2024,

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C)No.11553 OF 2019

                                        3




                                JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner is challenging Ext.P13 order passed by the

Ombudsman for Local Self Government Institutions

disposing the Petition filed by her with respect to extension

of drainage constructed by the Respondent No.2 up to the

point of her residential building in Smart Avenue Road

which starts from South Janatha road within the local limits

of the Respondent No.2. According to the petitioner, the

Ombudsman passed Ext.P13 Order holding that the

grievance of the petitioner is substantially redressed which

is not correct.

2. Counsel for the petitioner pointed out that Ext.P10

Statement filed by the Respondent No.3 shows that Smart

Avenue Road is having a length of 87 metres, petitioner's

residence is situated at 70 meters from the main road, the

original drainage was up to 32.5 mtrs. from the main road

and that new drainage is to be constructed at a length of W.P.(C)No.11553 OF 2019

37 mtrs to reach the point of petitioner's residence. He

pointed out that drainage is constructed upto 45 mtrs from

the main road pursuant to the proceeding stated in Ext.P10.

By this, the grievance of the petitioner is not redressed, but

the Ombudsman passed Ext.P13 Order illegally holding that

the grievance of the petitioner is redressed, he submits.

3. It seen from the pleadings and documents that the further

construction of drainage up to the point of the petitioner's

residence was dropped on that ground that the road in front

of the petitioner's house is lying at lower level than the

existing drainage and it is not feasible to construct a

drainage upto that point.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out that the

depth of the main drainage in the main road is 65 cms and

the depth of the existing drainage in Smart Avenue road is

only 45 cms. His submission is that it is feasible to construct

drainage upto the point of the petitioner's residence

enhancing the depth of the existing drainage in Smart

Avenue road starting slop from the point of petitioner's

residence.

5. Another person viz.Mr.C.M. Robin who has been residing W.P.(C)No.11553 OF 2019

beyond the point of the petitioner's residence filed

I.A.No.1/2019 seeking to implead himself as supplemental

Respondent No.6 and the same was allowed. His grievance

is that on account of the interim order obtained by the

petitioner, the tile laying work of the Smart Avenue road is

not completed and on account of the same he is unable to

take his car through the road to his house.

6. After hearing the parties, I am of the view that this Court

cannot decide matters which require technical expertise. It

is for the petitioner convince the authorities with respect to

suggestion made by her. It is for the Respondent No.3 to

consider the aforesaid contention of the petitioner after

taking a feasibility report from the technical experts

attached to the office of the Respondent No.2.

7. Accordingly, I dispose of this writ petition holding that the

finding in Ext.P13 Order that the grievance of the petitioner

is redressed is unsustainable and further directing the

Respondent No.3 to consider the contention raised by the

petitioner that it feasible to construct drainage upto the

point of the petitioner's residence enhancing the depth of

the drainage in Smart Avenue road starting slop from the W.P.(C)No.11553 OF 2019

point of petitioner's residence after taking Technical

feasibility report from the Engineering wing of the

Respondent No.2. The petitioner is free to file fresh

Representation in this regard. The Respondent No.2 is

directed to take a decision in the matter within a period of

two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment.

8. With regard to the grievance of the Additional respondent

No.6, the Respondent No.3 is directed to complete tile

laying works upto the point to which the drainage is existing

in Smart Avenue Road without delay and complete the

remaining portion after settlement of the issue raised by the

petitioner.

The above Writ Petition is accordingly disposed.

Sd/-

M.A.ABDUL HAKHIM JUDGE Shg W.P.(C)No.11553 OF 2019

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11553/2019

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 17.05.2017 EVIDENCING THE REMITTANCE OF LAND TAX ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, POONITHURA VILLAGE.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT EVIDENCING THE REMITTANCE OF PROPERTY TAX.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH PREPARED BY THE PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15.01.2016 PREFERRED BEFORE THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER COCHIN CORPORATION BY PETITIONER'S HUSBAND.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 16.07.2016 PREFERRED BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15.01.2016 PREFERRED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT BY PETITIONER'S HUSBAND.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 16.07.2016 PREFERRED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE INFORMATION DATED 09.05.2016 RECEIVED UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT FROM THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 20.12.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN.

EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT DATED 04.02.2017 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HON'BLE OMBUDSMAN ON 30.03.2017.

EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 15.03.2018 IN W.P.(C)No.11553 OF 2019

O.P.NO.853/2016 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 20.06.2018 IN O.P.NO.853/2016 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT R6(A)             COPY OF ASSET REGISTER

EXHIBITR6(B)              COPY OF THE SKETCH

EXHIBIT R6(a)             TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 5TH

RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HEALTH OFFICER DATED 17.04.2018.

EXHIBIT R6(C) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE SMART AVENUE ROAD AFTER THE LAYING OF THE SLABS

EXHIBIT R6(D) PHOTOGRAPH OF THE GARDEN