IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 12TH MARCH 2008 / 22ND PHALGUNA 1929 W.P(C).No. 23249 of 2007(P) PETITIONER: NALINIKUTTY AMMA, W/O. LATE MADHAVAN PILLAI, PUTHUPARAMBU VEEDU, VAZHAPPALLY WEST, THURUTHY P.O., CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.GOPALAKRISHNA KURUP RESPONDENTS: 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 5. APPACHANKUTTY @ XAVIER, S/O. PAPPACHAN, MARANGATTU P.O., THURUTHY, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 6. ANTONY JOSEPH @ BIJU, S/O. JOSEPH, KARINGADA HOUSE, P.O.THURUTHY, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 7. SASIDHARAN @ SASI, S/O. VELAYUDHAN, KEESHAMPANADU, P.O.THURUTHY, CHANGANACHERRY, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.C.S.MANU, R7 SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR GOVT. PLEADER, SRI. I.V. PRAMOD THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 12/03/2008, ALONG WITH WPC NO. 7386 OF 2008, THE COURT ON 12.03.2008 DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO. 23249/08 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.P. NO.5785/2003 DATED 19.2.2003. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.6419/2004 DATED 5.10.2004 EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WA NO.326/2005 DATED 22.12.2005 EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 4.2.2006 ISSUED TO RESPONDENTS 6 TO 8 BY THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, CHANGANASSERY EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE IN OS NO.183/1998 OF THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHANGANACHERRY DATED 26.7.2000. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 27.8.2005 ISSUED BY THE MUNSIFF'S COURT, CHANGANASSERY. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.8254/2006 DATEDS 31.3.2006. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 7.10.2006 PASSED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 27.10.2006 IN WPC NO.28140/2006. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 8.1.2004. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 28.4.2007 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. 7TH RESPONDENT EXHIBITS: EXT.R7(a): TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.629/89 DATED 21.3.1989 OF SRO CHANGANSSERY EXT.R7(b): TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX BEARING NO.844810 DATED 18.4.2005 EXT.R7(c): TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ASSIGNMENT DATED 1.3.2008 BEARING NO. 3137/08 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. =============== W.P.(C) NOs. 23249 OF 2007 & 7386 OF 2008 ==================== Dated this the 12th day of March, 2008 J U D G M E N T WPC 23249/07 Petitioner submits that she had submitted complaint to the Sub Divisional Magistrate against the obstruction offered by respondents 5 to 7 to a public pathway and also unauthorised constructions. It is stated that an order for removal of the obstruction was passed by the Sub Divisional Magistrate. That order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate was stayed by the Minister and the said order was challenged before this court and by Ext.P1, the writ petition was disposed of directing the Collector to consider the matter. Thereupon, the 2nd respondent passed Ext.P10 order directing removal of the obstructions and encroachments. That order was challenged by respondents 5 to 7 in WP(C) No.6419/04 and that writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P2 judgment holding that the challenge against the order of the 2nd respondent will not lie. Against the said judgment, WPC 23249/07 & 7386/08 :2 : petitioner filed WA 326/05 and that was disposed of by Ext.P3 judgment directing to complete the proceedings under the Land Conservancy Act. It is stated that thereupon Tahsildar issued Ext.P4 notice under the provisions of the Land Conservancy Act. That was appealed against to the 3rd respondent and on its dismissal, WP(C) 28140/06 was filed. That writ petition was disposed of by Ext.P9 judgment directing that respondents 5 to 7 shall not be evicted until the revision period is expired. In pursuance to the aforesaid judgment, a revision was filed and that also has been dismissed by Ext.P11 order. Even thereafter as the obstruction and the encroachment was not removed, this writ petition was filed seeking implementation of Ext.P11 order. 2. From the facts as stated above, it is evident that respondents 5 to 7 have exhausted all legal recourses that were available to them and Ext.P11 order also has become final as against them. In view of this, they are bound to comply with Ext.P11 and Ext.P11 order deserves to be implemented. Accordingly, this writ petition is disposed of directing implementation of Ext.P11. WPC 23249/07 & 7386/08 :3 : WPC No.7386/08 3. This writ petition has been filed by the 7th respondent in WP(C) No.23249/07. As already noted, Ext.P11 in W.P.(C) No. 23249/07 is dated 28/4/2007. Subsequent to Ext.P11, the 7th respondent who has filed this petition is seen to have filed Ext.P4 application on 1/3/2008 seeking assignment of 5 cents of land mentioned therein. It is stated that on Ext.P4, the 4th respondent Tahsildar has ordered an enquiry and at that stage this writ petition has been filed praying that he shall not be evicted until orders are passed on Ext.P4. 4. From the facts, it is obvious that the motive of the petitioner in filing Ext.P4 application on 1/3/2008 is to avoid implementation of Ext.P11 order produced by the petitioner in W.P.(C) No.23249/07. I do not see any bonafides in the application now made. For that reason, I decline to pass the relief sought for in this writ petition. Writ petition is dismissed. ANTONY DOMINIC,JUDGE. Rp