IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 21ST OCTOBER 2009 / 29TH ASWINA 1931 WP(C).No. 23431 of 2009(Y) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- 1. RAVIKUMAR, AGED 33 YEARS, S/O.KADAKARA, RESIDING AT 625, QMC COLONY, KOLLAM. 2. SUBASH, AGED 28 YEARS, S/O.SASIDHARAN, RESIDING AT NO.614, QMC COLONY, KOLLAM. 3. M.ARUMUGHAN, RESIDING AT M.C.1742, QMC COLONY, KOLLAM. 4. K.SHANKARAN, RESIDING AT MC 606A, QMC COLONY, KOLLAM. 5. MUTHU MADA SWAMY, MC 616, QMC COLONY, KOLLAM. BY ADV. SRI.AJAYA KUMAR. G RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. CORPORATION OF KOLLAM, REP. BY SECRETARY, CORPORATION OFFICE, KOLLAM. 2. SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF KOLLAM, CORPORATION OFFICE, KOLLAM. 3. THAZHILDAR, KOLLAM TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, KOLLAM. ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS FOR R1 & R2 R3 BY GOVT.PLEADER SRI.V.MANU. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 21/10/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXT.P1 - TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTOIN I.D.CARD NO.KL18/124/087170 ISSUED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P2- TRUE COPY OF RELEVANT PAGES OF RATION CARD OF THE 1ST PETITIONER. EXT.P3- TRUE COPY OF THE ELECTION I.D.CARD NO.DOK 2349314 OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P4- TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE RATION CARD OF THE 2ND PETITIONER. EXT.P5- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE RESIDENTS OF THE COLONY INCLUDING THE PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P6- TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT.24.7.2009 FILED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7- TRUE COPY OF THE G.O.NO.931/04/LSGD DT.5.3.2004. EXT.P8- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE MOTHER OF 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P9- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATOIN FILED BY THE MOTHER OF 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE THE THIRD RESPONDENT. EXT.P10- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED BY THE THIRD PETITIONER. EXT.P11- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FOR ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED BY THE 4TH PETITIONER. EXT.P12- TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATOIN FOR ASSIGNMENT SUBMITTED BY THE 5TH PETITIONER. EXT.P13- TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.8.2009 ISSUED TO THE 1ST PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' ANNEXURES: ANNEXURE R2(A) – TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE UNAUTHORISED CONSTRUCTION. ANNEXURE R2(B) - TRUE COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH OF THE MUNICIPAL COLONY. -TRUE COPY- P.S.TO JUDGE. THOTTATHIL B. RADHAKRISHNAN, J. = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = W.P.(C).No. 23431 of 2009-Y = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = Dated this the 21st day of October, 2009. JUDGMENT 1.Under the then existing system, the Kollam Municipality obtained services of a group of people who migrated from Tamil Nadu. With the passage of time, scavenging ended. Generations of the community were permitted to reside in row buildings on land which, going by the revenue records, is Government land. 2.Kollam Municipality, with the passage of time, became a Corporation thereby indicating that the population has grown many fold. The requirements of the town grew. The urbanisation, the profuse growth of educational establishments and other facilities brought home to the State Government and the Corporation, the need to have a four line way to run from a point called Aasraamam to a WPC23431/09 -: 2 :- point in the National Highway No.47, which could be referred as S.N.College Junction. Though that four line way is yet to come, the present available road has a small temple at the bell mouth towards S.N.College Junction. That has to give way when the four way road comes up. Cordial resolution of disputes should, naturally, be the goal. The Corporation and the temple authorities agreed to transplant the said temple to a different plot. For that, the Corporation identified a piece of land belonging to it. That lies adjacent to the land on which the petitioners reside. The process would result in carving off a portion of the area of land available in close proximity to the buildings occupied by the petitioners. 3.In the aforesaid context, this writ petition was filed contending that the petitioners are likely to be evicted without following the due process of law and without being notified of any intention to dispossess. Since the matter was WPC23431/09 -: 3 :- placed for consideration for admission just before the Onam holidays, it was thought fit to defer possession. Interim orders were, then, issued and the proceedings stand stayed, as of now. 4.With its statements on record supported by Exts.R2(a) and R2(b), the Corporation states that the petitioners will not be evicted, though it does not concede to any right of the petitioners to continue indefinitely in that place. The Corporation states that the land does not belong to the petitioners and their predecessors were permitted to occupy since at that point of time, they were working for the Corporation. The petitioners would state that some of them work with the Corporation, at least, on provisional basis. 5.Adverting to the photograph, Ext.R2(a) and the sketch Ext.R2(b), it appears that a portion of the building of one of the petitioners had to be WPC23431/09 -: 4 :- pulled down and what remains to be pulled down are essentially lean-to structures made using tin sheets etc. Though the learned counsel for the petitioners states that latrines, well etc. are also within the area that may be utilised for the temple, all that can be ensured is that the petitioners are permitted to occupy the buildings. The learned counsel for the Corporation also states that Corporation will consider providing any among the petitioners who may be affected by loss of latrine, well etc. for any economic support to put up alternate arrangements, if it is found essential. For the aforesaid reasons, recording the submission of the Corporation that the petitioners will not be evicted, it is ordered that the Corporation will ensure that the removal of the necessary portions of the structures as shown in Ext.R2(b) will be done with utmost care and caution to ensure that the remaining holdings are not affected impairing the user of the WPC23431/09 -: 5 :- remaining portion. It would also be sufficient, if the Corporation gives the petitioners 10 days' time to remove, at their expenses, the structures which may be marked out by the Corporation authorities for such purposes. The writ petition ordered accordingly. THOTTATHIL B.RADHAKRISHNAN, JUDGE. Sha/241009