IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2010 / 28TH ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 23849 of 2009(A) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- JOBY M.MATHEW, MUNAMATTAM, MUTHOLY POST, PANTHATHALA, PALA, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.B.KRISHNA MANI RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, MUTHOLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MUTHOLY P.O., PALA, KOTTAYAM. 2. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALA, KOTTAYAM. 3. MATHEW, S/O.JOSEPH, PAUNNIIKKAL (HOUSE), PANTHATHALA, MEENACHIL, PALA, KOTTAYAM. BY SRI.SUNIL CYRIAC,SC,MUTHOLY GRAMA PANCH FOR R1 GOVT.PLEADER SHRI A.J.VARGHESE FOR R2 ADV. SRI.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) FOR R3 SRI.GINESH.P. FOR R3 SRI.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) FOR R3 SMT.N.N.GIRIJA (ADV.COMMISSIONER) THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX IN W.P.(C)No.23849/09 PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED DATED 15.7.2008. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF PERMIT DATED 2.1.2009 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY OF THE MUTHOLY PANCHAYAT. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF PLAINT O.S.No.124/09 DATED 5.6.2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, PALA. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION, I.A.No. 734/09 DATED 5.6.09 FILED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, PALA. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION DATED 11.6.09 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 13.1.09 ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF OBJECTION DATED 16.1.09 FILED BY THE PETITIONER. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE RESURVEY PLAN. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE RESURVEY PLAN. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. EXT.P13: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. EXT.P14: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. EXT.P15: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH. EXT.P16: TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 14.8.09 TO THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PALA ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. RESPONDENTS EXTS: EXT.R1(A): TRUE COPY OF APPROVED SKETCH ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R1(B): TRUE COPY OF RESOLUTION NO.(IV(1) DATED 13.2.09 OF THE MUTHOLY GRAMA PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE. EXT.R1(C): TRUE COPY OF LETTER BEARING NO.A4-34/09 DATED 4.3.09 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. EXT.R1(D): TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION BEARING NO.A4-34/09 DATED 11.3.09 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE TAHSILDAR, MEENACHIL. WP(C).No. 23849/09(A) EXT.R1(E): TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE TAHSILDAR, MEENACHIL, BEARING NO.A4-34/09 DATED 10.7.09 ALONG WITH THE APPLICATION IN FORM 10. EXT.R3(A): TRUE COPY OF PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT FOR OBTAINING THE BUILDING PERMIT AND THE SAME IS APPROVED BY THE OVERSEER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 2.1.09. EXT.R3(B): TRUE COPY OF THE PRIOR DOCUMENT OF EXT.P1 DEED NO.2536/85 OF MEENACHIL SRO DATED 4.3.09. EXT.R3(C): TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 12.3.09 SENT BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT, KOTTAYAM. EXT.R3(D): TRUE COPY OF REPORT OF THE OVERSEER DATED 13.1.09. EXT.R3(E): TRUE COPY OF PROEPRTY REGISTER OF THE PANCHAYAT SHOWING THE WIDTH OF THE ROAD ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN FORM NO.3. TRUE COPY T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR,J. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No.23849 of 2009 A --------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 19th DAY OF JULY, 2010 JUDGMENT The petitioner herein is aggrieved by Exhibit P6 notice issued by the Panchayat with regard to the construction of a compound wall. 2. Heard parties. In Exhibit P6 communication the petitioner was informed that without leaving 8 metre width, he has constructed a compound wall and accordingly, he has to remove the same. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the construction of the compound wall is within his property and there is absolutely no reason for the Panchayat to issue Exhibit P6. 4. The contention of the Panchayat and the learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent is that the road itself was constructed with uniform width of 8 metres and the petitioner has also surrendered property for constructing such a road and in the plan also the width of the road is shown as 8 metres by him. The property register maintained by the W.P.(C)No.23849/09 -2- Panchayat also shows that there is a road having 8 metres width. 5. During the pendency of the Writ Petition, objection raised by the petitioner was heard by a Sub-Committee and on the basis of their report, the Panchayat Committee by a resolution dated 13.2.2009, which is produced as Exhibit R1(B), requested the Tahsildar to depute the Taluk Surveyor for fixing the boundary of the road on either side and also directed the petitioner not to continue with the construction of the compound wall till a final decision is taken by the Panchayat. 6. It is pointed out in the counter affidavit filed by the Panchayat that by Exhibit R1(c), a copy of the resolution was communicated to the petitioner also. 7. The Advocate Commissioner appointed by this Court has filed a report which is relied upon by the petitioner to contend that there is no uniform width of 8 metres at various points indicated going by the measurements taken by the Commissioner. 8. The issue, therefore, is whether the road is having a width of 8 metres as contended by the learned counsel for the Panchayat and the learned counsel for the 3rd respondent. Herein W.P.(C)No.23849/09 -3- one of the contentions raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is having a total extent of 67 Ares 97 Sq.m of property and he has also surrendered land for the construction of a road. Evidently, the issue therefore could be decided, only if a survey is made by the Taluk Surveyor with the help of the documents maintained by the Panchayat and the title deeds of the parties concerned. 9. The petitioner has already constructed his house and the inner compound wall. After fixing boundaries on either side, measurements will have to be taken by the Taluk Surveyor and then only a decision can be taken by the Panchayat, after hearing the petitioner and the 3rd respondent. Till final orders are passed by the Panchayt, the petitioner will not make any further construction. The survey will be conducted with notice to the petitioner and the 3rd respondent and any other affected parties. Thereafter the petitioner and the 3rd respondent will he heard again by the Panchayat with respect of the survey measurements and thereafter the Panchayat will pass appropriate orders. 10. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that since he has also surrendered property for laying the road, the W.P.(C)No.23849/09 -4- entire aspects could be assessed only if the Surveyor measures his entire property and the boundaries are also identified. It is open to the petitioner or all concerned parties to approach the Tahsildar or the Taluk Surveyor as the case may be, for having such measurement as per rules. The Panchayat will expedite the matter and final proceedings will be issued, at any rate, within a period of four months. The Writ Petition is disposed of as above. T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE. dsn