IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON THURSDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2010 / 25TH BHADRA 1932 Con.Case(C).No. 1048 of 2010(S) ------------------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT IN WPC.26700/2007 Dated 24/03/2009 .................... PETITIONER: --------------- TONY THOMAS, AGED 53 YEARS, S/O.THOMAS, KIZHAKKEKARA, IRUMBAKACHOLA (P.O), KANJIRAPUZHA, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SMT.DAISY A.PHILIPOSE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. K.V.MOHAN KUMAR, S/O.NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED 48 YEARS, THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD 678001. 2. V.UNNIKRISHNAN, S/O.NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER, AGED 45 YEARS, TAHSILDAR, MANNARKKAD - 685584 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. I.V. PROMOD. THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16/09/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. = = = = = = = = == = = = == = = = = = = CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE. No. 1048 of 2010 = = = = = = = = == = = = = = = = = = = = = DATED THIS, THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER , 2010. J U D G M E N T The writ petition was disposed of by this Court as per judgment dated 24.3.2009 with the direction as follows: "Viewed in the above facts and circumstance, particularly in the light of the contents of Ext.P7 issued from the Taluk Office, Mannarkkad as to the encroachment stated as effected, it has become very much necessary to have the concerned properties on the side of the 'Irumpakachola river' measured out and demarcated with the help of the competent authorities and to retrieve the public property, if at all any encrochment has been effected, whether it be by the respondents No.5 and 6 or by the petitioner or anybody else. The first and second respondents shall consider and dispose of the matter ensuring that all the encroachers on the side of the 'Irumpakachola river' within their area and jurisdiction are evicted in accordance with the relevant provisions of the law; simultaneously ensuring that the natural flow and course of the river is not diverted in any manner. The proceedings in this regard shall be finalised as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within a period of six months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment." However, the petitioner is constrained to approach this court by filing this Contempt of Court Case, stating that absolutely no effective steps have been taken by the respondents/contemnors to give effect to the verdict. CON. C. CASE 1048/2010 2 2. The second respondent has filed an affidavit explaining the facts and circumstances specifically pointing out that the survey in respect of the property has already been completed as directed by this Court with the help of the Taluk Surveyor whereby it has been found that the 5th respondent in the writ petition has encroached nearly 7.17 cents of purampoke land and the 6th respondent has encroached nearly 15.23 cents of land in the concerned survey number. It is also stated in Para 4 of the said affidavit that the natural flow of the river has not been diverted. 3. Pursuant to the further steps, taking note of the fact that the portion encroached by the respondents 5 and 6 is vested with the Irrigation Department, they have been alerted and requested by Ext.R2(a) letter dated 18.7.2009 to take remedial measures to restore the position. Similarly, taking note of the fact that the river is vested with the local authorities, ie. the Kanjirapuzha Grama Panchayat, Ext. R2(b) letter dated 13.11.2009 has been issued to the Secretary, for further follow up action, alerting of the direction given by this Court. It is asserted in the said affidavit that all earnest efforts have been taken by the concerned respondents and there is absolutely no fault on their side, much less any wilful default so as to attract the offence of contempt. CON. C. CASE 1048/2010 3 Taking note of the fact that the personal grievance of the petitioner with regard to the alleged diversion of the natural flow of the river has been found against and further that appropriate proceedings have already been taken by the concerned respondent after effecting survey and identifying the portions encroached by the concerned persons and also by alerting the concerned authorities, who are not parties to the writ petition to restore the position, this Court finds that no further proceedings are required to be pursued in this matter. Accordingly, the contempt of court case is closed, however, without prejudice to the rights and liberties of the petitioner to move this Court for redressal of the grievance, if any, in respect of the encroachment stated as effected by the concerned parties. P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE) KNC/-