P.V.Parameswaran vs Kottayam Grama Panchayath
2025 Latest Caselaw 12399 Ker

Kerala High Court

P.V.Parameswaran vs Kottayam Grama Panchayath on 17 December, 2025

Author: Anil K. Narendran

Bench: Anil K. Narendran

W.A.No.2705 of 2025            1                       2025:KER:96525



               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K. NARENDRAN

                                     &

             THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MURALEE KRISHNA S.

 WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2025 / 26TH AGRAHAYANA, 1947

                          WA NO. 2705 OF 2025

          AGAINST THE JUDGMENT DATED 08.10.2025 IN WP(C)NO.34411 OF

2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA

APPELLANT(S)/PETITIONER:

      1      P.V.PARAMESWARAN,
             AGED 78 YEARS
             S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, NIRMALA BHAVAN,
             KOTTAYAM AMSOM, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O,
             THALASSERI TALUK, KANNUR (DT)- 670 643.

      2      NIRMALA PARAMESWARAN,
             AGED 66 YEARS,
             W/O. P.V. PARAMESWARAN,NIRMALA BHAVAN,
             KOTTAYAM AMSOM, KOTTAYAM MALABAR P.O,
             THALASSERI TALUK, KANNUR (DT)- 670 643.

             BY ADVS.
             SHRI.SHREEHARI K.K.
             SHRI.SHYAM MOHAN A.K.
             SHRI.K.RAJESH KHANNA

RESPONDENT(S)/RESPONDENTS:

      1      KOTTAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
             REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, KOTTAYAM POYIL P.O.,
             KANNUR (DT)- 670 691.

      2      THE SECRETARY,
             KOTTAYAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOTTAYAM POYIL P.O.,
             KANNUR (DT) 670 691.

      3      SATHI K.,
             ANGANWADI WORKER, KAPPARA ANGANWADI, MOUVVERY,
             KOTTAYAM POYIL P.O, KANNUR (DT) -670 691.
 W.A.No.2705 of 2025              2                    2025:KER:96525



      4       KUNNUMCHERY GANGADHARAN,
              AGED 64 YEARS
              S/O. KANNAN, VENGAKANDI HOUSE, (JYOTHIS),
              KOTTAYAM POYIL P.O., KANNUR (DT)- 670 691.

              BY ADVS.
              SHRI.R.RAJPRADEEP, SC
              SHRI.SACHIN RAMESH
              SMT.SREEDEVI S.

          THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.12.2025,
THE COURT ON 17.12.2025 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.A.No.2705 of 2025           3                    2025:KER:96525



                            JUDGMENT

MURALEE KRISHNA S., J The petitioners in W.P.(C)No.34411 of 2022 filed this writ

appeal under Section 5(i) of the Kerala High Court Act, 1958,

challenging the judgment dated 08.10.2025 passed by the learned

Single Judge in that writ petition.

2. Going by the averments in the writ petition, the

petitioners are in ownership and possession of property having an

extent of 55 cents of Kottayam village in Kannur District. On the

southern side of the property, there is an unused pathway. On

30.06.2022, when the petitioners came back from Bangalore after

visiting their daughter, it was alarmingly noticed that the mud wall

on the southern boundary of the property was destructed to a

length about 70 meters encroaching upon the petitioners'

property. On enquiry, it is learned that the encroachment is made

at the instance of the 4th respondent, who is a welfare committee

member of the Kappara Anganwadi. It is understood that the 4 th

respondent and his men committed trespass with a view construct

a road to the Anganwadi encroaching upon the property of the

petitioners. The petitioners thereupon filed a suit as O.S.No.

351/2022 before the Munsiff Court, Kuthuparamba with a prayer W.A.No.2705 of 2025 4 2025:KER:96525

for mandatory injunction directing the 4th respondent and his men

to restore the property to its original position and restraining them

from making further encroachment to the petitioners' property

and for a declaration that the encroached property belongs to the

petitioners and for damages. In the suit, a commission was taken

out and the commissioner submitted Ext.P2 report evidencing the

encroachment.

2.1 After the institution of the suit on 06.08.2022, the 2nd

respondent issued Ext.P3 notice dated 17.08.2022 directing the

petitioner to remove the laterite stones placed by the petitioners

in the way to the Anganwadi. The petitioners submitted Ext.P4

reply dated 30.08.2022. The petitioners have also submitted

complaints before the police authorities and the Police issued

Ext.P5 communication dated 28.09.2022 stating that the dispute

is to be resolved by the competent Civil Court. On 17.10.2022,

the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P6 on the same lines in ExtP3.

2.2 In W.P.(C)No.34411 of 2022, the appellants sought a

writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P3 notice dated 17.08.2022 issued

by the 2nd respondent and Ext.P6 communication dated

17.10.2022 issued by the said respondent, and issue a writ of

mandamus commanding the 2nd respondent not to pass any orders W.A.No.2705 of 2025 5 2025:KER:96525

interfering with the civil dispute between the appellants and

respondents 3 and 4.

3. In the writ petition, respondents 1 and 2 filed a counter

affidavit dated 28.12.2022, producing therewith Exts.R2(a) and

R2(b) documents. Paragraphs 4 to 9 of that counter affidavit read

thus:

"4. With regard to the averments contained in this writ petition, it is most humbly submitted that the Anganwadi no. 107 (Kappara Anganwadi) situate in ward no. 2 of this Grama Panchayat. There is a small lane with an average width of 2m. starting from the Vengad road and joining the Kappara-Aambilad road, which is used as a public road. This small by-lane, known as 'KapparaAngawadi road', is having a length of 150 m. and is a motorable earthen road where two-wheelers and small vehicles like autorickshaws are plying. The students of the Anganwadi are mainly depending upon this road and the food items and other articles are brought to the Anganwadi through this lane for many decades. The said road is included in the asset register maintained by this Grama Panchayat as ID No. 214810050000000330. A copy of the relevant page of the asset register is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R2(a).

5. It is submitted that as this respondent is not included in the party array in O.S. No. 351/2022 before the Hon'ble Munsiff Court, Koothuparambu, this respondent is unable to make any comments in that matter.

W.A.No.2705 of 2025 6 2025:KER:96525

6. It is further submitted that the Kappara Anganwadi is just opposite to the property of the petitioners. On 26/07/2022, the 3rd respondent filed a complaint before this respondent stating that the petitioner has blocked the Kappara Anganwadi Lane by unloading laterite stones in the middle of the lane, and on verification, it was found that the complaint is genuine. A photograph showing the present state of the road is produced herewith and marked as Exhibit R 2(b). Hence, Exhibit P3 notice was issued to the petitioners.

7. Pursuant to Exhibit P3 notice, the petitioners submitted Exhibit P4 reply on 30.08.2022, claiming that he has not done any action which obstructs the above-said road. He alleged that the 4th respondent and some others had, infact, demolished the boundary wall of the petitioner and placed some laterite stones in the road. An enquiry conducted by this respondent revealed that the 1st petitioner has started to construct a new compound wall in the place of the earthen compound wall ("Kayyala") and when the people of the locality objected to the construction and asked him to construct the compound wall after getting a permit from the panchayat, the petitioner stopped the construction and left the laterite stones in the middle of the road causing obstruction of free movement through the road. Exhibits P5 letter issued by the SHO, Koothuparambu Police Station to the 2nd petitioner reveals a clear picture of what happened in the matter. The Police, after enquiry, found that the 1st petitioner has started Construction of the compound wall without a permit from the panchayat, and when objected by the people, he stopped the construction and left the stones W.A.No.2705 of 2025 7 2025:KER:96525

in the middle of the road.

8. It is submitted that upon considering the difficulties encountered on the road and as a follow-up action on the complaint of the 3rd respondent, this respondent issued Exhibit P6 notice to the petitioner.

9. It is most humbly submitted that this respondent has not directed or authorized anyone to demolish the Compound wall or to make any damage to the compound wall of the petitioner. What this respondent did in this matter is that when there was an obstruction in the road, and it was found that the petitioner is behind the obstruction, Exhibit P3 and P6 notices were served on the petitioner. Instead of removing the laterite stones as directed in Exhibit P3 and P6 notices, the petitioner filed this writ petition."

4. After hearing both sides and on appreciation of

materials on record, the learned single Judge by the impugned

judgment dated 08.10.2025 disposed of the writ petition.

Paragraphs 5 and the subsequent paragraph of that judgment

read thus:

"5. Admittedly as per Exts.P3 and P6 the petitioners are directed to remove the laterite stones placed in the pathway used by the children to reach the Anganwadi, which is also included in Ext.R2(a) asset register of the Panchayat. As per the averments in the counter affidavit the petitioners attempted to construct a compound wall without obtaining permit from the Panchayat and when it was objected by the people, they have stopped the construction and blocked the road.

Taking into consideration the above facts and circumstances and the fact that the pathway/road is used by the children to reach W.A.No.2705 of 2025 8 2025:KER:96525

the Anganwadi, I am of the view that the directions in Exts.P3 and P6 are not liable to be interfered with. Petitioners shall take steps to see that the laterite stones placed in the pathway, which is included in Ext.R2(a) asset register of the Panchayat, shall be removed by them forthwith, at any rate, within an outer limit of one week from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. If the petitioners does not remove the laterite stones lying in the said pathway, respondents 1 and 2 will be free to remove the same at the expense of the petitioners. It is further ordered that the trial court shall decide O.S.No.351 of 2022 untrammelled by any of the observations made in this judgment. The writ petition is disposed of as above."

5. Being aggrieved, the appellants have filed the present

writ appeal.

6. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the

learned Standing Counsel for the Kottayam Grama Panchayat.

Considering the nature of the relief sought, issuance of notice to

the respondents 3 and 4 is dispensed with.

7. The learned counsel for the appellants would submit

that there is a civil suit pending between the appellants and

respondent No.4 as O.S.No.351 of 2022 on the file of Munisiff

Court, Kuthuparamba. But the 1st respondent, Panchayat, is not a

party to that suit. It is at the instance of the 4th respondent, the

Panchayat issued Exts.P3 and P6 notices ordering the removal of

laterite stone from the alleged road, which is in fact the private W.A.No.2705 of 2025 9 2025:KER:96525

property of the appellants. The learned Single Judge disposed the

writ petition, being misled by the respondents that the private

pathway of the appellants is a Panchayat road. Hence, the

interference of this Court on the impugned judgment is highly

necessary.

8. On the other hand, the learned Standing Counsel for

the respondents 1 and 2 would submit that there is no illegality in

the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge and the road

in question is vested with the Panchayat. In respect of the said

road, a suit is also pending between the parties before the

competent civil court. Therefore, no interference is needed on the

impugned judgment.

9. We have carefully perused the materials placed on

record and the impugned judgment of the learned Single Judge.

By Exts.P3 and P6 notices, which are under challenge in the writ

petition, the Panchayat has directed the appellants to remove the

laterite stone stacked by them in the pathway used by the children

to reach the Anganwadi, which, according to the Panchayat, is

included in Ext.R2(a) asset register of the Panchayat. We have

noticed that in respect of the disputed pathway, a civil suit is also

pending before the competent court between the appellants and W.A.No.2705 of 2025 10 2025:KER:96525

the 4th respondent. Since the issue pertaining to the road is

pending consideration before the competent Civil Court, which has

to be decided on the basis of facts and evidence, a decision

regarding the right over the said road cannot be arrived at by

exercising jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of

India. It is by finding a prima facie case in favour of the Panchayat,

the learned Single Judge directed the removal of the laterite

stones stacked by the appellants in the disputed road. If the

appellants have any grievance against the claim of the Panchayat

pertaining to the status of the road, the remedy of the appellants

is not under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

10. Having considered the pleadings and materials on

record and the submissions made at the Bar, we find no illegality

or perversity in the impugned judgment of the learned Single

Judge, which warrants interference by exercising appellate

jurisdiction.

In the result, this writ appeal stands dismissed.

Sd/-

ANIL K. NARENDRAN, JUDGE Sd/-

    nak                         MURALEE KRISHNA S., JUDGE
 W.A.No.2705 of 2025              11                     2025:KER:96525



                      APPENDIX OF WA NO. 2705 OF 2025

PETITIONER ANNEXURES

Annexure A               TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED DATED
                         03.01.2011
Annexure B               TRUE COPY OF THE ASSIGNMENT DEED DATED
                         15.11.2012
Annexure C               TRUE COPY OF THE THE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT
Annexure D               TRUE COPY OF THE GIFT DEED DATED 13.08.2010
Annexure E               THE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT