IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC TUESDAY, THE 5TH JULY 2011 / 14TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18019 of 2011(B) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- K.RAMDAS, S/O.AYYAPPAN, AGED 65 YEARS, APSARA VILLA, AMBIKA NAGAR, AKKATHE THARA AMSOM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.N.K.KARNIS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679101. 2. AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHIBHAVAN, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679101. 3. BALARAJAN, PATHOMKULATHE VEEDU, PATHANKOLIL, THOTTAKKARA, OTTAPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679101. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. P.M. SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 18019 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1 : COPY OF THE SALE DEED P2 : COPY OF THE SALE DEED P3 : COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT4.6.2010 P4 : COPY OF THE OBJECTION OF THE PETITIONER TO EXT.P3 DATED 15.06.2010 RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE smvd ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18019 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 5th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioner claims to be the owner of 4.53 Acres of land in Sy.No.45/4 and 61/12 of Ottapalam village. According to the petitioner for the better enjoyment of the property, he did some maintenance work of an existing road. Thereupon the 2nd respondent issued Ext.P3 notice alleging that the petitioner violated the provisions of Act 28 of 2008. Petitioner submitted Ext.P4 explanation. It is stated that there was no progress in the matter thereafter. The petitioner further alleges that while the matter is thus pending, 2nd respondent is now threatening to demolish the road. It is with this allegation he has filed this writ petition seeking a direction to the 2nd and 3rd respondent not to initiate any proceedings to demolish the existing road. Under the provisions of the Act 28 of 2008, the 2nd respondent is to report the matter to the District Collector for action in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Since W.P.(C) No. 18019 OF 2011 :2 : according to the petitioner proceedings are still pending before the 2nd respondent, I direct the 2nd respondent to report the matter to the District Collector for further action in the matter. Thereafter the District Collector shall finalize the proceedings in accordance with law. Until the matter is reported and finalised as above, it is directed that the petitioner as well as the 2nd respondent will maintain the status quo as on today in so far as the road in question is concerned. The writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/-