IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON TUESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2009 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 4859 of 2007(C) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): -------------------------- 1. THILOTHAMA, W/O. SIVAN, TC.59/991, M.S.K. NAGAR (SINKARATHOPPU), MANACAUD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SURESH, S/O. APPU, -DO- -DO- 3. SASI, S/O. CHELLAPPAN, -DO- -DO- BY ADV. MR.G.SUDHEER RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SC & ST WELFARE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE DIRECTOR, SC DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, REPRESENTED BY IT'S SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, PALAYAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. SPL.GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.SANTHOSHKUMAR FOR R3 BY ADV. MR.N.NANDAKUMARA MENON THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ........................................................................ W.P.(C) No. 4859 OF 2007 ......................................................................... Dated this the 24th March, 2009 J U D G M E N T Alleging highhanded action mainly on the part of the 4th respondent Corporation in attempting to evict the petitioners from 'MSK Nagar colony' formerly known as 'Sinkarathoppu colony', the petitioners have approached this court with this Writ Petition. 2. The case of the petitioners is that they belong to very poor families and are living in the huts constructed in the property comprised in Sy.No.1081 of Manacaud Village, which is actually owned by the third respondent-the Scheduled Castes Development Department. Most of the residents of the colony belong to Scheduled Caste. This being the position, it is contended that the 4th respondent-Corporation does not have any manner of right whatsoever to resort to any step for forcefully evicting the petitioners from the property. 3. The third respondent has filed a counter affidavit W.P.(C) No. 4859 OF 2007 2 pointing out that the concerned property having an extent of 9 acres and 98 cents belongs to the said respondent and neither the petitioners nor the 4th respondent can have any claim or right over the said property. It is stated that the colony was set up on 02.10.1966 and 'pattayam' was issued in respect of certain occupants in the next year. It is asserted that though the petitioners are residing in the huts constructed therein, they cannot have any proprietory or possessory rights to the detriment of the third respondent; simultaneously pointing out that no such right is claimable by 4th respondent-Corporation as well. 4. The third respondent submits in paragraph No.5 of the counter affidavit that the department received a letter dated 31.01.2007 from the 4th respondent-Corporation, on the subject of demolition of unauthorised sheds constructed in the property in question . As per the said letter, the 4th respondent had requested for permission of the third respondent to remove 14 sheds illegally constructed in the property and also to construct a Shopping Complex-cum-Community Hall. The third respondent W.P.(C) No. 4859 OF 2007 3 as per the reply dated 20.02.2007 informed the 4th respondent that the Corporation had no right whatsoever to enter into the property without the consent or permission of the department and to carry out any construction/demolition therein and also that since the property was belonging to the Scheduled Caste Department, it could only be used for the welfare of the persons belonging to the scheduled castes. It was also conveyed to the Corporation that the question of granting permission would be considered only if the beneficiaries of the Shopping Complex were exclusively the persons belonging to Scheduled Castes, particularly since the proposed construction was by making use of 'Special Component Plan (SCP) Fund' . It is also stated in the very same paragraph that the Corporation is not having any right to construct a shopping complex or to evict the petitioners or others who are the residents in the above said property; further contending that it will be for the 4th respondent to take appropriate action against the petitioners or other residents with regard to the question of eviction and that such steps will be pursued, as and when found necessary. W.P.(C) No. 4859 OF 2007 4 5. The Corporation submits that, if at all any construction is to be done in the property, it being a land coming within the Corporation area, necessary sanction has to be obtained from the Corporation. The third respondent submits that they-the property owners- did not have any idea to construct any shopping complex or other building in the property at the relevant time and as such involvement of the Corporation is not contemplated.. In any view of the matter, this aspect does not form the subject matter of the present Writ Petition. 6. In view of the factual position as discussed above, it is hereby declared that the petitioners are not liable to be evicted from the said property by the 4th respondent Corporation; which right is exclusively vested with the 3rd respondent . The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE. lk W.P.(C) No. 4859 OF 2007 5