IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 28TH MAY 2009 / 7TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 9200 of 2009(T) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- 1. BABU JOSEPH, AGED 40 YEARS, SON OF JOSEPH, OTHALAMATTATHIL HOUSE, P.O.ATHIRAMPUZHA - 686 562, PADINJATTUMBHAGAM KARA ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE, ETTUMANOOR TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 2. ACHANKUNJU @ THOMAS JOSEPH, AGED 53 YEARS, SON OF JOSEPH, OTHALAMATTATHIL HOUSE, P.O.ATHIRAMPUZHA - 686 562, PADINJATTUMBHAGAM KARA ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE, ETTUMANOOR TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. 3. SEBASTIAN JOSEPH, AGED 48 YEARS, SON OF JOSEPH, OTHALAMATTATHIL HOUSE, P.O.ATHIRAMPUZHA - 686 562, PADINJATTUMBHAGAM KARA, ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE, ETTUMANOOR TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.JOHN JOSEPH VETTIKAD RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM. 3. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER AND SUB-DIVISIONAL MAGISTRATE, MINI CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM. 4. THE TAHSILDAR, MINI CIVIL STATION, KOTTAYAM. WP(C).No. 9200 of 2009(T) 5. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, COLLECTRATE, KOTTAYAM. 6. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, COLLECTRATE, KOTTAYAM. 7. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, ETTUMANOOR. 8. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, ETTUMANOOR. 9. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE OFFICE, P.O.ATHIRAMPUZHA. 10. JOHNY MATHEW, AGED ABOUT YEARS, SON OF MATHEW, PULIYIRIKUMMUKALEL HOUSE, P.O.ATHIRAMPUZHA - 686 562, PADINJATTUMBHAGAM KARA ATHIRAMPUZHA VILLAGE, ETTUMANOOR TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R9 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.P.N. SANTHOSH R10 BY ADV. MR.M.V.THAMBAN, MR.R.REJI, MR.B.BIPIN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 28/05/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 9200 of 2009(T) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1: COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B 868/2007 DATED 14/02/2007 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 2ND PETITIONER AND THE 10TH RESPONDENT ON THE COMPLAINT OF THE PETITIONERS. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.B 868/2007 DATED 31/12/2007 ISSUED BY 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 10TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT APPEARED IN MALAYALA MANORAMA DATED 01/01/2008. EXT.P4: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 02/09/2008 AND THE ENDORSEMENT NO.868/07 DATED 02/09/2009 WHICH FORWRDED TO THE 8TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5: COPY OF THE LETTER NO.A.16/2008 DATED 20/12/2008 ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, ATHIRAMPUZHA. EXT.P6: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 17/11/2008 SUBMITTD BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P7: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 29/11/2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE HOME MINISTER OF KERALA STATE. EXT.P8: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 09/03/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P9: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.A2.193/2008-09 DATED 16/02/2009 ISSUED BY ATHIRAMPUZHA GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXT.P10: COPY OF THE MATHRUBHOOMI DAILY DATED 01/02/2009. EXT.P11: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 15/03/2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 8TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P12: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 16/03/2009 FILED BY THE PETITIONERS BEFORE 2ND RESPONDENT WITH COPY TO RESPONDENTS 3&5. EXT.P13: COPY OF THE DEEPIKA DAILY DATED 16/03/2009. EXT.P14: COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER IN I.A.NO.197/2007 AND I.A.NO.230/2007 IN O.S.NO.36/2007 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, ETTUMANOOR. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: EXT.R10(a): COPY OF THE COMMISSION REPORT IN I.A.NO.231/2007 AND I.A.NO.209/2007 IN O.S.NO.36/2007 OF THE HONOURABLE MNSIFF'S COURT ETTUMANOOR. EXT.R10(b): COPY OF THE COMMON ORDER DATED 28/05/2007 IN I.A. NO.197/2007 AND I.A.NO.230/2007 IN OS.NO.36/2007 OF THE HONOURABLE MUNSIFF'S COURT ETTUMANOOR. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rs/ V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No. 9200 of 2009 -------------------------- Dated this the 28th May,2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioners, who claim to be the owners in possession and enjoyment of 60 cents of paddy field comprised in Sy. Nos.420/12,420/13 and 420/17 of Athirampuzha village, are aggrieved by what they call as inaction on the part of the officials to enforce Exhibits P1 and P2 orders passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. According to them, the 10th respondent attempted to fill up the paddy field with soil without authority and permission under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. Therefore, petitioners moved the Revenue Divisional Officer complaining of contraventions of the provisions of the Land Utilisation Order. This resulted in Exhibit-P1 notice being issued by the Revenue Divisional Officer. It is contended that in spite of the same, the 10th respondent continued the filling of the land and this will detrimentally affect the petitioners. After the passing of W.P ( C) No. 9200 of 2009 2 Exhibit-P1 order, petitioners moved the Civil Court for an injunction restraining the 10th respondent for filling up the land in his possession. The varambu which separates the different paddy fields have also been filled up thereby obstructing passage to their paddy field. By Exhibit R10 (b) order the learned Munsiff declined to grant injunction and on a reading of the said order it is found that this has been done essentially for the reason that the petitioners have not taken any steps to enforce Exhibit-P1 order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer. The suit is still pending. 2. Learned counsel for the 10th respondent submits that the petitioner has already approached the Civil Court. He is dis-entitled from invoking jurisdiction under Article 226 of the Constitution of India. The only direction the petitioner now prays for is one to the Revenue Divisional Officer to see that the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order are enforced in relation to the land belonging to the 10th respondent also. This has been sought before the Revenue Divisional Officer by Exhibit-P4 W.P ( C) No. 9200 of 2009 3 representation. The limited prayer now advanced is for a direction to the Revenue Divisional Officer to look into Exhibit-P4, hear both the parties and take appropriate action. 3. I heard learned Government Pleader also. 4. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to look into Exhibit-P4, hear the petitioners and the 10th respondent and see that appropriate action is taken for enforcement of the order passed by the competent authority under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order. Needful shall be done within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No. 9200 of 2009 4 W.P ( C) No. 9200 of 2009 5