Kerala High Court
Madhu Thampan @ M.A.Madhu vs The District Collector on 25 August, 2025
W.P.(C) No.41552 of 2022 1
2025:KER:64606
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF AUGUST 2025 / 3RD BHADRA, 1947
WP(C) NO. 41552 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
MADHU THAMPAN @ M.A.MADHU,
AGED 56 YEARS
FLAT NO. 11 D, TRINITY HIGH GROOVE,
TOWER A, THRIKKAKKARA WEST,
OPP. MODEL ENGINEERING COLLEGE,
ERNAKULAM - 682021.
BY ADVS.
SHRI.SUBHASH CYRIAC
SMT.SHEEBA JOSEPH
SMT.ASHA JYOTHY
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM-686002.
2 KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
THIRUNAKKARA, KOTTAYAM -686001.
BY ADV SHRI.AJIT JOY, SC, KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
25.08.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.41552 of 2022 2
2025:KER:64606
VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
.................................................................
W.P.(C) No.41552 of 2022
.................................................................
Dated this the 25th day of August, 2025
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed seeking a direction to the
respondents to return the possession of approximately 10 cents of land,
which forms part of the larger extent of land admeasuring 21.44 Ares in
re-survey No.589/5-2 of Nattakam Village, Kottayam Taluk, Kottayam
District, encroached by them and constructed a concrete pathway.
2. Petitioner is the owner of 21.44 Ares of land in re-survey
No.589/5-2 of Kottayam Taluk in Nattakam Village vide document
No.2254 of 1997 dated 27.06.1997. Petitioner was permanently
residing at Pune, Maharashtra and during his visit to Kerala, he found
that 2ndrespondent Municipality has constructed a concrete pathway of
approximately 3 meters width through the land owned by the petitioner.
Petitioner has a case that he has not given permission to the
Municipality to construct a pathway through the said land and
thereupon Ext.P2 petition was filed before the 2 nd respondent. It is
aggrieved by the same that the present writ petition has been filed.
2025:KER:64606
3. A detailed counter affidavit has been filed by the 2 nd
respondent Municipality contending that the issue involved is purely a
question of fact which cannot be adjudicated in a writ petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India. It is further contended that the
pathway that is the subject matter of the writ petition is called
"Puthuvalchira Road" and the said pathway is included in the asset
register maintained by the Municipality with start point as "Anandhu
Bhavan Road" and end point as "Household" and is recorded as having
a length of 0.127727 kms. and the said pathway was concreted in the
year 2010-2011 using MLA fund and re-surfaced in the year 2018-2019
using the Municipal plan funds. It is stated that on receiving notice in
the writ petition, the site was again inspected by the overseer and found
that the length and width of the pathway as it presently stands
correspond to the details entered in the asset register of the
Municipality. It is further stated that there are at least five residential
houses situated by the side of the "Puthuvalchira Road" for whom the
said pathway is the only means of access.
4. Pursuant to the direction issued by this Court on 17.06.2025,
the learned counsel appearing for the 2nd respondent Municipality has
produced the relevant page of the asset register of the Kottayam
Municipality showing inclusion of "Puthuvalchira Road" as Ext.R2(a),
2025:KER:64606
along with a memo dated 04.07.2025.
5. I have heard the rival contentions on both sides.
A perusal of Ext.P2 notice addressed to the 2nd respondent
would show that it itself is a suit notice. Further, a perusal of Ext.R2(a),
the relevant page of the asset register, would reveal that the subject
road is included in the asset register of the Kottayam Municipality.
Petitioner submits that the inclusion of the subject road in the asset
register is without any basis and the same is liable to be interfered with.
This Court in Kurian Paul v. Inspector of Police and others, 2023(2)
KLT 441 has considered a similar issue, wherein paragraphs 7, 15 and
16 read as follows:
"7. In the counter affidavit filed on behalf of the Panchayat, it is stated
that the road namely "Manjaly Road" mentioned in Ext.P4 Asset
Register as item number 212 is vested in the Panchayat.
.............. ............. ............
15. The Asset Register of the Panchayat being a statutory document
maintained in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj
(Accounts) Rules, 2011, the entries therein have to be presumed to
be correct unless it is established that the same are incorrect.
16. O.S. No. 312 of 2003 filed by the petitioner for declaration of
easement by prescription over the pathway was dismissed by the
Court by Ext. P9 judgment dated 21/08/2004 on the ground that his
right then was inchoate. Since the road is included in the Asset
Register of the Panchayat, there is presumption regarding the
vesting of road in the Panchayat consequent to the entries therein,
which is rebuttable. Accordingly, it is for the respondents 5 to 7 to
2025:KER:64606
establish in appropriate proceedings that the entries are wrong and
made without any legal sanction. By virtue of the entries made in
Ext.P4 Asset Register, there is conferment of the rights over the
road in favour of the Panchayat and the respondents 5 to 7 cannot
obstruct the access of the petitioner to the road. S.272 of the K P R
Act provides that all roads vested in or maintained by a Panchayat
shall be open to the use and enjoyment of all persons. Accordingly,
there will be a direction to the 4th respondent to remove all
obstructions on the northern side of the petitioner's property
abutting the road shown as item No.212 in Ext. P4 Asset Register
forthwith. The observations herein and the direction issued will not
impede any remedy available to respondents 5 to 7 in civil laws."
In Kurian Paul's case cited supra also the contention taken by the
respondent Panchayat is that the said road forms part of the asset
register maintained by the Panchayat. This Court has held that the
asset register of the Panchayat being a statutory document maintained
in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Accounts)
Rules, 2011, the entries therein have to be presumed to be correct
unless it is established that the same are incorrect and therefore
relegated the petitioner therein to the competent civil court to establish
that the entries made are wrong and is made without any legal
sanction.
Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances
in the case, I am of the view that no relief could be granted to the
petitioner in this writ petition and if the petitioner is aggrieved by the
2025:KER:64606
inclusion of the subject road in the asset register, it is for the petitioner
to initiate appropriate proceedings before the competent civil court for
redressal of his grievances. Granting such liberty to the petitioner, the
writ petition is disposed of.
Sd/-
VIJU ABRAHAM
JUDGE
cks
2025:KER:64606
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 41552/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.2254/1997
DATED 27.6.1997 EXECUTION IN FAVOUR OF
THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF PETITION DATED 25.10.2022
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED
25.10.2022 GIVEN BY THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE ONE AND THE SAME
CERTIFICATE DATED 16.10.2022.
Exhibit P5 A true copy of the Basic Tax receipt
for the year 2025-26 of the Natakam
village, dated 28.04.2025
RESPONDENT EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT R2(a) True copy of the relevant pages of the
Asset Register of Kottayam
Municipality showing inclusion of
Puthuvalchira Road
