IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2009 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 29426 of 2008(C) ---------------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- ANANDAN P. ANANDA BHAVANAM, THAVALAPPARA, PERINJOTTAKKAL P.O., KONNI, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.VINOY VARGHESE KALLUMOOTTILL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. CHIEF ENGINEER, (SOUTHERN REGION) KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P.H.DIVISION, PATHANAMTHITTA. 3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, P.H.DIVISION, PATHANAMTHITTA. 4. SECRETARY, DISTRICT PANCHAYATH, PATHANAMTHITTA. 5. SECRETARY, KONNI GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KONNI. BY ADVS. MR.M.DINESH, SC, KWA FOR R3 MR.SIBY MATHEW FOR R5 MR.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU FOR R5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ANTONY DOMINIC, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 29426 of 2008 ------------------------------------ Dated this the 25th day of March, 2009 JUDGMENT Complaining that the Panchayath and the Kerala Water Authority are not providing sufficient water taps for the supply of water in the locality of Thavalappara, the petitioner filed a writ petition before this Court as WP(C) No. 27353/2008. During the pendency of the writ petition, the Panchayath passed Exhibit P1 resolution resolving that one of the location of the pipe will be at Pattila Kudumbam (near Anantha Bhavanam). In view of the resolution thus taken by the Panchayath, the writ petition was declined to be entertained by this Court and was disposed of by Exhibit P3 judgment. 2. Subsequently, alleging that resolution was not implemented, this writ petition has been filed. It is stated that during the pendency of this writ petition, necessary concrete structure for installing the water pipe was constructed by the Water Authority at the location mentioned in Exhibit P1. However, after completing the civil works, pointing out certain obstructions, Exhibit R5(b) letter was issued by the Water Authority requiring the Panchayath to suggest an alternate site. W.P.(C) No. 29426/2008 2 Following Exhibit R5(b), the Panchayath by Exhibit R5(c) resolution appointed a Sub Committee to locate the exact site for relocating the tap. Thereafter, the Panchayath passed Exhibit R5(d) resolution resolving to shift the site of the water tap by 16.2 meter from the earlier identified site, which is said to be towards its north. 3. Petitioner therefore submits that the shifted location is not at all beneficial to anyone. According to him, the existing site is the most suitable and convenient one for the local people to supply drinking water. 4. On the other hand, counsel for the Panchayath submits that in view of the obstruction offered by the local public, at the instance of the Water Authority, they had to identify a new site. It is also their case that the earlier site at which the structure was constructed, was within the private property of the petitioner and that the said site was enclosed by him by putting up fences. It is stated that if the water tap is installed at the earlier site, it will be beneficial only to the petitioner and not to the public. According to them, taking into account grievances W.P.(C) No. 29426/2008 3 raised by the local public, they decided to shift the site. 5. During the course of hearing, counsel for the petitioner offered that the site where the structure has been constructed now, which is within the private property of the petitioner, can be surrendered in order to dispel the impression of the Panchayath that the attempt of the petitioner is to get water tap installed in his property and reduce the area in to his possession. He undertakes before this Court that in respect of the place where the structure and foundation has been constructed including the area needed for access and for laying pipelines, he will not have any claim and that the Panchayath will be free to make use of the same in the manner it deems fit. 6. Therefore, from the submissions made it is evident the petitioner is relinquishing all rights that he has in respect of aforesaid portion of the land and he is surrendering the same to the Panchayath without any claim what soever. If so, there is no reason to shift the site from the existing location, where the structures have already been completed. 7. Therefore, taking into account the submissions thus W.P.(C) No. 29426/2008 4 made by the counsel for the petitioner, I dispose of this writ petition with the following directions; I record the submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner to the above effect and direct that for the sake of completion of records, the petitioner will execute an agreement in favour of the Panchayath, reiterating the undertaking given before this Court and thereupon the Panchayath will take necessary steps for installing the water tap at the location in question. It is directed that the agreement as above should be executed by the petitioner within two weeks of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Needless to say that if he does not do so, the Panchayath will be at liberty to implement the decision as reflected in Exhibits R5© and R5(d) resolutions. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE scm