IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 13TH JULY 2011 / 22ND ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 18997 of 2011(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONERS: --------------- 1. AMEER SULTHAN, AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL GAFOOR, AJITHA MANZIL, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM, HOUSE NO. 681, PALLITHOTTAM, KOLLAM. 2. MAHIN, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.ABDUL GAFOOR, HOUSE NO.680, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 3. NEBEESA BEEVI, AGED 65 YEARS, HOUSE NO.513, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 4. SALKA BEEVI, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.PAREED KUNJU, HOUSE NO.1435/44, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 5. SHIHABUDEEN, AGED 47 YEARS, S/O.AHAMMEDKOYA, HOUSE NO.197/22, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 6. ABDUL LATHEEF, AGED 54 YEARS, S/O.MOIDEENKANNU, HOUSE NO.206/44, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 7. SHEREEFA BEEVI, AGED 67 YEARS, W/O.SHAHUL HAMEED, HOUSE NO.196/45, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 8. GEEVARGHESE, AGED 48 YEARS, S/O.CHAKKO, HOUSE NO.1446/44, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 9. SAINULABDEEN, AGED 56 YEARS, S/O.ALIKUNJU, HOUSE NO.828/44, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 10. FAHIDA, AGED 29 YEARS, W/O.DILEEP, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. 11. NEBEESA BEEVI, AGED 70 YEARS, WP(C).No. 18997 of 2011(Y) W/O.KARIM, AATTUKAL PURAYIDAM,PALLITHOTTAM,KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI. K.SIJU SRI.S.ABHILASH SMT.BINDU GEORGE RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-1. 2. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM-13. 3. THE TAHSILDAR, KOLLAM TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM-691001. 4. VILLAGE OFFICER, KOLLAM WEST VILLAGE, KOLLAM-691001. GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13/07/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 18997 of 2011(Y) APPENDIX --------------- PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS ---------------------------------- P1:- THE COPY OF DOCUMENTS TO PROVE THE POSSESSION OF THE RESPECTIVE HOUSES BY THE PETITIONERS IN PALLITHOTTAM DIVISION OF KOLLAM CORPORATION. P2:- THE COPY OF NOTICE RECEIVED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER DATED 2.2.2011 OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT. P3: - A COPY OF NOTICE DATED 28.5.2011 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER. P4:- THE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 3.6.2011 AND THE RECEIPT DATED 3.6.2011 P5:- THE COPY OF EVICTION NOTICE DATED 11.7.2011 SERVED ON THE PETITIONERS. RESPPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL RKC //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ---------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No. 18997 OF 2011 ----------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 13th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are residents on the bank of Kollam Thodu, in Pallithottam Division of Kollam West Village. Consequent on the implementation of the project of widening the Kollam Thodu and the renovation of National Waterways, like several others similarly situated, petitioners are also required to be evicted from the existing spaces occupied by them. To rehabilitate the petitioners the Government have implemented a housing project and houses in that project area have been allotted to them also. In spite of it, on the ground that places allotted are situated at far away places, allotted have not vacated from the existing places. Therefore they are now called upon to vacate from such places and to occupy the allotted places. In the meanwhile, petitioners filed Ext.P4 W.P.(C) No. 18997 OF 2011 :2 : representation requesting that they be accommodated at convenient places mentioned in the aforesaid representation. Orders have not been passed on Ext.P4 so far. It is in this situation this writ petition is filed seeking to quash Ext.P5 and to direct consideration of Ext.P4 representation. 2. First of all petitioners have no legal right whatsoever to continue occupation of the present area, on which they have no title. As part of implementation of the project, Government have suitably compensated those who are to vacate the places occupied by them by providing alternate accommodation. This court cannot expect the respondents to provide suitable residence to all affected parties. When a project is implemented in public interest, inconvenience is bound to be caused to some of the affected parties. Persons who have been allotted houses should have vacated from the existing places so as to W.P.(C) No. 18997 OF 2011 :3 : facilitate the implementation of the project. These petitioners have not done so and therefore respondents were justified in issuing Ext.P5. Therefore I do not find any illegality with Ext.P5 notice. 3. Be that as it may, if as stated by the petitioners they have filed Ext.P4 representation requesting for allotment of places at a convenient location the said representation shall be considered by the 2nd respondent as expeditiously as possible. The petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the Writ Petition before the concerned authority for appropriate action. Sd/- ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE ul/- [true copy] P.S. to Judge