IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 15TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 26TH MAGHA 1931 WP(C).No. 38198 of 2008(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- E.RAVEENDRAN, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O.KARTHIAYANI AMMA, EACHARATH HOUSE, PUTHUR KARA AYYANTHOLE P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT. BY ADVS. MR.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR, SMT.P.A.ANITHA. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THRISSUR CORPORATION, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, O/O.THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR. 2. HEALTH OFFICER, THRISSUR CORPORATION, THRISSUR. 3. SREENIVASAN,H.NO.11/189/8, KALALAYA APARTMENTS, PUTHURKARA, PANICKAR LANE, THRISSUR. *ADDL.R4 IMPLEADED: 4. THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, REPRESENTED BY ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER, O/O POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, THRISSUR. *ADDL. R4. IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DT. 11/03/09 IN I.A. 3346/09. R1 & R2 BY MR.K.B.MOHANDAS,SC,THRISSUR CORPORATION ADV. MR.LELLULAL T.G.THUNDATHIL, R3 BY ADVS. MR.G.SREEKUMAR (CHELUR), SMT.PREETHY KARUNAKARAN, ADDL.R4 BY MR.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS.S.C. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 15/02/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.38198/2008-V: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF THRISSUR CORPORATION DTD. 12/05/08. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THRISSUR. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE ORDER DTD. 12/11/2008 OF THE HEALTH OFFICER, THRISSUR CORPORATION. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.4.A: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.4.B: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.4.C: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.4.D: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.4.E: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.5.A: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.5.B: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.5.C: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.5.D: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE ACTUAL STATE OF AFFAIRS OF THE PROPERTY. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS. EXT.P.6.A: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS. EXT.P.6.B: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS. EXT.P.6.C: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS. W.P.(C). NO.38198/2008-V: EXT.P.6.D: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS. EXT.P.6.E: COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE PRESENT STATE OF AFFAIRS. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------ WP(C) No. 38198 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated, this the 15th day of February, 2010 JUDGMENT 1. Petitioner is a resident of Ayyanthole Village. He submits that his residential house is situated close to an apartment complex known as 'Kalalaya apartment complex'. His grievance is that filth and waste water discharged from the premises of the apartment complex flows into his premises and that despite complaints made to the Corporation, no remedial action has been taken. It is stated that on an earlier occasion, pursuant to the coercive action initiated by this Court, Corporation had taken steps, but however again filth and waste water has accumulated in the premises of the petitioner and that even inspite of complaints made, no action has been taken. 2. Learned counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent who allegedly was the Secretary of the Residents' Association of the residents of the apartment complex submits that he has since shifted from the premises and therefore, is not interested in the litigation. W.P.(C).38198/08 2 3. The learned Standing Counsel for respondents 1 and 2, on the other hand, submits that when complaints were made, they had intervened on an earlier occasion and remedial action was also taken. It is stated that hereafter also they shall take appropriate action to remedy the grievance of the petitioner. However, he points out that a large tree is standing in the premises of the petitioner has as its root is projecting into the canal, which is situated in between the petitioner's property and the apartment complex, as a result of which the free flow of water is obstructed. 4. It needs no reiteration that it is the responsibility of the 1st respondent to ensure that hygiene is maintained in the area. If as a matter of fact, the tree standing on the premises of the petitioner, is the cause of obstruction to the free flow of water, it is always open to respondents 1 and 2 to issue notice and require the petitioner to cut and remove the tree and if necessary, action to be taken by the Corporation itself. Therefore, existence of a tree can be no answer on the part of the Corporation nor can the W.P.(C).38198/08 3 Corporation wriggle out of its obligation, on this ground. 5. Writ petition is therefore, disposed of directing respondents 1 and 2, to take appropriate action, for cleaning the canal which is situated in between the petitioner's property and the apartment complex. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE mrcs