IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 2440 of 2010(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BENNY VARGHESE, AGED 43, S/O.VARGHESE, MURICKELIL HOUSE, KUMBALAM, KUMBALAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN-682506. BY ADV. MR.ABRAHAM P.GEORGE SMT.K.V.LAKSHMY RESPONDENT(S): -------------- 1. VYTTILA BLOCK PANCHAYAT, OFFICE AT KOTTARAM JN. MARADU P.O., PIN-682304. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, BLOCK DEVELOPMENT OFFICE, VYTTILA, OFFICE AT KOTTARAM JN. MARADU P.O., PIN-682304.ERNAKULAM DISTRICT. 3. M.F.JOSEPH ALIAS THANKACHAN, S/O.FRANCIS, MURICKELIL HOUSE, KUMBALAM, KUMBALAM P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-682506. 4. ASOKAN, S/O. GOPALAN,KOMAROTH HOUSE, KUMBALAM, KUMABALM P.O. ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN-682-506 ADV. MR.GEORGE SEBASTIAN FOR R3, R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. K.RAMESH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C)2440/ 2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS Ext.P1 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED NO.2323/06 OF SRO, MARADU Ext.P2 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX PAID RECEIPT PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY COVERED UNDER EXHIBIT P-1 Ext.P3 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGREEMENT FOR SALE DATED 18.10.93 BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND APPUKKUTTAN. Ext.P4 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.572/94 OF SRO, MARADU. Ext.P5 : ROUGH SKETCH SHOWING THE LIE AND NATURE ON THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY PATHWAY AND THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. Ext.P6 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR NO.F-941021/09 DATED 14.08.2009 Ext.P7 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE DETAILED ESTIMATE OF THE WORK AS APPROVED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. Ext.P8 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT LODGED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE IST RESPONDENT DATED 15.01.2010. Ext.P9 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE IST RESPONDENT Ext.P10 : PHOTOCOPY OF THE POLICE COMPLAINT DATED 19.1.2010 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SI OF POLICE, PANANGAD POLICE STATION. Ext.P11 : RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE S.I OF POLICE, PANANGAD POLICE STATION. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : Ext.R3A : COPY OF THE RELINGUISHMENT APPLICATION DATED 30.09.2009 BY JOSSY, KUTTATHUVEETIL. Ext.R3B : COPY OF THE RELINGUISHMENT APPLICATION DATED 01.10.2009 BY SUKUMARAN A.K. Ext.R3C : COPY OF THE RELINGUISHMENT APPLICATION DATED 30.09.2009 BY LUSY VARGHESE. Ext.R1(a) : COPY OF THE RELINGUISHMENT LETTER // True Copy // PA to Judge. SS/. T.R. RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C). No.2440/2010-D ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated this the 15th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader appearing for the first respondent and the learned counsel appearing for respondent Nos.3 and 4. 2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the action taken by the first and second respondents allegedly in trying to encroach upon his property for making a road in Ward No.14 of Kumbalam Panchayat as approved by the District Collector in Ext.P6. According to the petitioner, he is the owner and in possession of 24.950 cents of land in re-survey No.252/8 in Block No.15 of Kumbalam Village. It is supported by Exts.P1 and P2 documents. Now the work in question is being done as per Ext.P6 order passed by the District Collector. It appears that there is a puramboke canal which lies to the western side of the petitioner's property and the petitioner apprehends that in the process of filling up the canal for constructing the road, the property of the petitioner will also be encroached upon. 3. A counter affidavit has been filed by respondent Nos.3 and 4. It is mentioned that there is no proposal to construct road through any portion of the petitioner's W.P.(C). No.2440/2010 -:2:- property. The learned counsel for the third respondent submitted that the work has to be completed on or before 31/03/2010 and a number of people have relinquished their properties for the implementation of the said scheme and the petitioner alone has opposed the same. 4. In the counter affidavit filed by the first respondent, it is averred that the proposed construction is to connect two roads by filling puramboke land canal portion and the work is entrusted with a beneficiary committee. The families staying on the side of the road are the beneficiaries of the proposed road and it is highly useful for the surrounding people and they have surrendered their land for implementing the said scheme. There is no question of encroaching the petitioner's property. It is pointed out that the petitioner has constructed fence on the puramboke land and thus he is an encroacher. 5. It is evident from paragraph (5) of the counter affidavit of the first respondent that the work is proposed to be carried out in puramboke land and there is no need to surrender any of the portion of land owned by petitioner and the existing canal which is unused is proposed to be filled up. 6. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that by making such constructions, the petitioner's W.P.(C). No.2440/2010 -:3:- property may not be encroached upon. The first and second respondents will ensure that construction is made only as per the alignment proposed and drawn up. There will not be any encroachment on the petitioner's property for effecting construction. If any further dispute arises from the part of the petitioner or anybody else during the process of the construction, then the matter will be verified by the Village Officer concerned and the measurement of the site will be made, if required, and appropriate steps will be taken to fix the boundary also before completing the construction. Since the work has to be completed before 31/03/2010, the respondents will see that the work is completed as per the schedule. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) ms