IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 24TH JUNE 2011 / 3RD ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 16496 of 2011(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- MANOJ K.N., AGED 39 YEARS, S/O.NARAYANAN, KARINAT, ADIMALI P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.MOLLY JACOB RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, N.H SECTION, ADIMALI P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, N.H (R) DIVISON, MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. ADIMALI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, ADIMALI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, ADIMALI P.O., - IDUKKI DISTRICT. GOVT.PLEADER SMT.M.J.RAJASREE THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/06/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.16496/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED BEARING NO.747/05 OF SRO DEVIKULAM DT 1.3.2005. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DT 16.4.11. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF POSSESSION AND ON ATTACHMENT CERTIFICATE DT 18.4.2011. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION AND NON ATTACHMENT CERTIFICATE DT APRIL 2010. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF FACTUAL REPORT FROM THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM BEARING NO.C2-10030/10 DT 2.7.2010. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE FROM THE SUB REGISTRAR, DEVIKULAM DT 24.5.2010. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT NO.G.620/08 (372) DT 4.3.2009. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE NO OBJECTION CERTIFICATE NO.A4- 327/2009 DT 3.2.2009. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 16496 OF 2011 (J) ===================== Dated this the 24th day of June, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be in possession of 3.20 ares of land on the strength of Ext.P1 title deed. According to the petitioner,in the said property, based on Ext.P7 permit and Ext.P8 NOC and in compliance with the conditions thereof, a building was constructed. It is stated that the 1st respondent approached the petitioner and directed him to demolish the thatched portion of the said building and warned that unless demolition is completed before 5.00 p.m on 20/6/2011, he will demolish the said portion without further notice. It is with this allegation, petitioner filed this writ petition with the following prayers:- i) issue a writ of prohibition restraining the respondents from demolishing the thatched portion of the petitioner's building situated in property covered by Ext.P1 which is constructed in accordance with Ext.P8. ii) to declare that the 1st respondent has no authority to demolish the thatched portion of the petitioner's building which is constructed strictly in accordance with Ext.P8. 2. When the writ petition came up for admission on 20th of June, 2011, this Court directed the learned Government Pleader to obtain instructions in the matter and also directed that in the WPC No. 16496/11 :2 : meanwhile, status quo should be maintained. 3. Today, when the matter came up, on the basis of the instructions obtained from the 1st respondent, learned Government Pleader submitted that the 1st respondent had received a complaint alleging that the petitioner had made certain constructions in violation of Exts.P7 and P8 and that acting upon the said complaint, the 1st respondent directed the 3rd respondent to conduct an inspection and submit a report. It is stated that apart from the above, neither did he threaten to demolish any construction nor has he directed the 3rd respondent to demolish any portion of the petitioner's building. It is also submitted that the report from the 3rd respondent is still awaited and that action in accordance with law will be taken only after receipt of the report. 4. From the submissions thus made by the learned Government Pleader, it is obvious that the apprehension, on the basis of which the writ petition has been filed by the petitioner, is WPC No. 16496/11 :3 : baseless. Therefore as at present, petitioner has no grievance to be redressed by this Court. In the light of the above, recording the submission made by the learned Government Pleader, this writ petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp