IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2011 / 7TH SRAVANA 1933 WA.No. 1670 of 2009() --------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.20067/2009 Dated 16/07/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER NO.1 ------------------------------------------------- MARAKKAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MARAKKAR, KADAAMPUZHA VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.JACOB SEBASTIAN RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS & PETITIONER NO.2 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1. KADAMPIL DEVAKI, D/O.VELAYUDHAN, PILATHARA, P.O.KADAMPUZHA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. 2. THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, BARTON HILL BUNGLOW, KUNNUKUZHI, VANCHIYOOR P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. MOORKKATH SAKKEENA, MEMBER WARD NO.12, MARAKKAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KADAMPUZHA VIA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. ADV. SMT.M.A.BINDU FOR R1 SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.K.MEERA FOR R2. THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/07/2011 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.Chelameswar, C.J. & Antony Dominic, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.A.No. 1670 OF 2009 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 29th day of July, 2011 JUDGMENT Antony Dominic,J. The first petitioner in WPC 20067/09 is the appellant. 2. The first respondent herein filed a complaint to the 2nd respondent, a copy of which is Ext.P3, mainly alleging that a road was constructed through 5 cents of land belonging to her without her permission and by threatening her. After issuing notice and considering the objections the 2nd respondent passed order dated 19th March, 2009(Ext.P6). 3. The relevant portion of Ext.P6 is extracted as follows. “Panchayath could not, however produce any such relinquishment letter or surrender form and hence the said version cannot be believed. Since the Panchayath is not prepared to pay compensation, the petitioner can either be allowed to take back the encroached portion through construction of a wall or a direction with W.A.No. 1670 OF 2009 -:2:- regard to compensation payable can be passed. In the circumstances the DDP is directed to visit the property with notice to the petitioner and fix the boundary that was available before the widening and produce a sketch showing the relevant details, so that the petitioner can be allowed to restore her property up to the said limit. The DDP will also mention in the report the compensation that has to be paid to the petitioner in case the restoration as above fails. Post for report on 21.5.2009.” 4. It is challenging Ext.P6 order the appellant and the 3rd respondent filed the writ petition which was dismissed by judgment dated 16th July, 2009. It is aggrieved by this judgment the appeal has been filed. 5. A reading of Ext.P6, the impugned order and the judgment in the writ petition show that despite directions, the appellant could not produce any relinquishment letter or surrender form executed by the first respondent. On the other hand, it has been specifically noticed by the learned Single Judge that on query by the Court, learned counsel for the appellant fairly stated that there was no surrender form duly signed and obtained from the W.A.No. 1670 OF 2009 -:3:- first respondent either under the Land Relinquishment Act or Rules or even under the other enabling provisions available under the Panchayath Raj Act. It was considering the above factual position and also the admitted fact that the land in question of the first respondent was made use of for the purpose of constructing the Panchayath road, without acquiring, purchasing or getting the property surrendered by any process known to law that the writ petition was dismissed confirming Ext.P6 order. In view of the aforesaid factual and legal position, we find no reason to interfere with the judgment under Appeal. Accordingly this Writ Appeal is dismissed. Sd/- J.Chelameswar, Chief Justice. Sd/- Antony Dominic, Judge. ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge