IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 17TH JUNE 2010 / 27TH JYAISTHA 1932 WP(C).No. 15961 of 2010(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------ P.P.SUNNY, AGED 48,S/O.POULOSE PENGIPARAMBIL HOUSE, CONVENT ROAD, CHALAKUDY. BY ADVS. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR) MRS.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN MR.K.RAVI (PARIYARATH) RESPONDENT(S): --------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP.BY THE SECRETARY THE GOVT. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVT. PUBLIC WORKS, DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE KERALA ROAD FUND BOARD, REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, PATTOM, KOWADIAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM MR. P. NARAYANAN – GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.15961 OF 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 17th day of JUNE, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner herein is the owner of the property described in Ext.P1. For the purpose of widening the Pattom-Kowadiar road, part of the property of the petitioner was acquired. In the acquired property by the side of the petitioner's property, a drain is being constructed. According to the petitioner, for construction of that drain, the respondents are encroaching into the balance property of the petitioner, without taking steps for acquiring the same. It is under the above circumstances, the petitioner has filed this writ petition seeking the following reliefs: “i) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents not to enforce ExtP2 as is sought to be done in the said communication. ii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the respondents to effect appropriate measurements of the property in question through the subordinate officers in the presence of the petitioner with a notice to him and only after fixing the boundary, to effect any further constructions either of the drain or of the road in the interest of justice. iii) Issue an appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P3 and appropriate orders may be passed and till such time not to proceed further with any construction as is sought in Ext.P2 in the interest of justice”. 2 In Ext.P2, the proposal is as follows: “The Kerala Road Fund Board has no new proposal for widening the road in question. The Board has already acquired 45m2 of land from your property for road widening. Since you have made floor tiling up to the edge, there are chances of edge of tiles of about 10 cms for a length of 8 mts. is to be relocated/negotiated while finishing the side drains on the road”. From the same, I do not think that there is any attempt to encroach into the property of the petitioner. But in the process of constructing the drain, edge of the tiles of the petitioner is likely to be affected. That cannot be termed as an encroachment as such. I am of opinion that since the drain is for public purpose which would enure to the benefit of the petitioner also, the petitioner should put up with such small inconvenience. In view of the said opinion of the court, the learned counsel for the petitioner restricts his prayer for construction of the drain in the presence of the petitioner. In the above circumstances, this writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the respondents to see that the petitioner is also given a notice, so that he can be present on the date when the drain is being constructed by the side of the petitioner's property. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd 3 4