IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 26TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 4194 of 2009(Y) ------------------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------------- 1. ST.DON BOSCO GIRLS, HIGH SCHOOL, KODAKARA PO., THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS MANAGER-IN- CHARGE, SR.STELLA. 2. M.T.THOMAS, S/O.THOMAS, MADATHANI HOUSE HOUSE NO.1/219, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 3. C.P. ANTONY, S/O. PORINCHUNNI, CHETHALAN HOUSE, HOUSE NO. 1/224, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. FEBY JOSEPH, S/O. C.P. OUSEPH, CHITTATTUKARA HOUSE, HOUSE NO.1/221, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. SHOY GEORGE, S/O.C.P.GEORGE, CHITTATTUKARA HOUSE, HOUSE NO.1/220, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 6. BINOJ MATHEW, S/O.C.P.MATHAI, CHITTATTUKARA HOUSE, HOUSE NO.1/222, KODAKARA, THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.RANJITH XAVIER. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. SECRETARY, KODAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KODAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT OFFICE, KODAKARA PO., THRISSUR. 2. KODAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, KODAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT OFFICE, KODAKARA PO., THRISSUR, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. W.P.(C). NO.4194/2009: 3. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OFFICE OF THE R.D.O, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, KODAKARA VILLAGE OFFICE KODAKARA VILLAGE, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. JOSE KALLARAKKAL, S/O.KALLARAKKAL RAPHAEL, KALLARAKKAL HOUSE, (OLD) POLICE STATION ROAD, KODAKARA P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. R2 BY ADV. MR.T.N.MANOJ, R5 BY ADVS. MR.P.VIJAYA BHANU, MR.M.GEORGE THOMAS. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17/09/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.4194/2009-Y: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE CERTIFIED EXTRACT OF PAGE NO.5 OF THE REGISTER SHOWING THE DETAILS OF ROADS IN PROTECTION OF KODAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH SHOWING THE (OLD) POLICE STATION ROAD, KODAKARA. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD. 07/05/2008 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE R.2. GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE PETITION DTD 21/07/2008 TO REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, J. ------------------------------------------- W.P(C).No.4194 OF 2009 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of September, 2009 JUDGMENT 1.This writ petition is nothing but a request to adjudicate on a question regarding the width of a road. The allegation of the petitioners, the first among whom is shown to be the Manager in charge of a Girls School, is that the 5th respondent has encroached into a portion of the panchayat road some time in 2008. Proceedings is stated to have been initiated before the Additional District Magistrate under Section 133 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel for the petitioners quite candidly states that the said proceedings is now virtually frozen having regard to the institution of this writ petition. 2.The petitioners allege that the panchayat authorities are not taking action and that the compound wall is newly constructed. The panchayat is on record by stating that the 5th respondent had not obtained any permit for putting up the wall. But the fact remains that he has done so on the same line where an WPC.4194/09 Page numbers earlier wall stood and on an existing foundation. The panchayat points out that the fact remains that not only the 5th respondent, there may be even others who have encroached on to the said road. The panchayat further states that as of now, there is no impairment of the free movement of vehicles. 3.With the aforesaid scenario, I do not deem it necessary to issue any writ of mandamus or direction compelling the panchayat to proceed with any particular type of action. Firstly, that may not be within the province of this Court unless the situation really warrants that. Such a situation arises only when this Court is satisfied that non-enforcement of law has resulted in breach of justice. I am not satisfied that the panchayat has failed to act in such manner as the petitioners would desire. The panchayat in its wisdom could take action for restoration of possession of lands but, in my view, should not be compelled under any circumstances. It should be left to the LSGI to decide such matters at the grass root level. It cannot be forgotten that the concept of management of such WPC.4194/09 Page numbers issues stands left to them by the constitutional amendments in that regard. With that, the writ court cannot be reduced to a mere whip boy to slash of as and when a petition is filed and pending in some jurisdiction. For the foregoing reasons, this writ petition is dismissed, however, without prejudice to the right of the petitioners to seek any relief in accordance with law from other jurisdictions and also for the panchayat to take action as it may deem fit and necessary in any circumstances. Sd/- THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, Judge. kkb.22/9.