IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH SEPTEMBER 2009 / 25TH BHADRA 1931 WP(C).No. 24887 of 2009(E) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- SATHEESH BABU,S/O.VASUDEVAN PILLAI, VADAKKE AMBATTU HOUSE, PUTHENANGADI.P.O, KOTTAYAM. BY ADV. SRI.A.K.HARIDAS RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KOTTAYAM. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, KOTTAYAM. 3. KOTTAYAM MUNICIPALITY,KOTTAYAM REP; BY IT'S SECRETARY. 4. ANAND R.GOURI SADANAM,PUTHENANGADI.P.O, KOTTAYAM. 5. SUSHEELAMMA,GOURI SADANAM,PUTHENANGADI. P.O,KOTTAYAM. 6. TALUK SURVEYOR,KOTTAYAM TALUK,KOTTAYAM. ADV. SRI.SIBY MATHEW FOR R3 SRI.PHILIP J.VETTICKATTU FOR R3 SRI.B.PREMNATH (E) FOR R3 BY GP K R DEEPA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16/09/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J ........................................... WP(C).NO. 24887 OF 2009 ............................................ DATED THIS THE 16TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2009 JUDGMENT Notice to respondents 4 to 6 dispensed with, preserving their right to seek rehearing, if aggrieved by the directions contained in this judgment. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Government Pleader for respondents 1 and 2 and learned standing counsel for third respondent. Alleging that private respondents have trespassed into a public way, which vests in the panchayat, there were earlier litigations before this court. Following the directions of this court, the Municipality considered the matter and concluded that even if there was reduction of the width of the road at the relevant location, the question whether it is because of encroachment, is a matter that could be finally decided only on appropriate survey and any further proceedings could be taken only on identifying the land, if any, encroached upon. While the petitioner states that no due action follows on such decision, third respondent Municipality states that it has Wpc 24887/2009 2 written to the survey department to measure out the property and fix the alignment so that if there is encroachment, appropriate action could be taken. The Kerala Municipalities Act, 1994 and the Rules framed thereunder and law relating to Land Conservancy provide the effective measures for recovery of lands, if any, encroached upon. Those statutory provisions also have sufficient remedies to any person who is proceeded against under those laws. But matters cannot be delayed. For this, survey department has to conclude its action as requested by the Municipality. Obviously, there cannot be any limited time frame for the Municipality to finally decide or to take action in the matter. 3. For the aforesaid reasons, respondents 1 and 2 are directed to ensure that the application of the third respondent before the survey authorities are taken up and acted upon in accordance with law, at the earliest and any required survey is completed within an outer limit of four months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. On obtaining report from the survey department, if further steps are found necessary, third respondent shall take the necessary steps by commencing Wpc 24887/2009 3 proceedings, in accordance with law, within a period of four weeks therefrom. All other issues left open. Writ petition ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE lgk/17/9