IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.K.ABDUL REHIM TUESDAY, THE 19TH JULY 2011 / 28TH ASHADHA 1933 WP(C).No. 17133 of 2011(N) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- GOPALAKRISHNAN, S/O.VARUVILA KOCHUKUNJU, AGED 48 YEARS, KONNIYUR MURI, PERUMKULAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGADU TALUK, PUNALAL P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT-695 572. BY ADV. SRI.ABRAHAM MATHEW (VETTOOR). RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 004. 2. THE DISTRICT SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, THRISSUR – 650 001. 3. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODAKARA, THRISSUR, PIN – 650 001. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KODAKARA, THRISSUR, PIN – 650 001. 5. THRILOKACHANDRAN, VALIYAPARAMBIL, MANAKULANGARA P.O., ANATHADAM, KODAKARA, THRISSUR, PIN-650 654. 6. SHAJU, S/O.CHATHAN, PADANNAKULANGARA, MANAKULANGARA P.O., ANATHADAM, KODAKARA, THRISSUR, PIN-650 654. W.P.(C). NO.17133/2011-N: 7. SATHEESH BABU, KOLAPRAN, MANAKULANGARA P.O., ANATHADAM, KODAKARA, THRISSUR, PIN-650 654. 8. SUJEESH BABU, KOLAPRAN, MANAKULANGARA P.O., ANATHADAM, KODAKARA, THRISSUR, PIN-650 654. 9. BABU, S/O.OMANA, PERUMPALLY, MANAKULANGARA P.O., ANATHADAM, KODAKARA, THRISSUR, PIN-650 654. 10. SHIVANANDAN, S/O.RAMAKRISHNAN, MARATHAMPILLY, MANAKULANGARA P.O., ANATHADAM, KODAKARA, THRISSUR, PIN-650 654. R1 TO R4 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. CHARISMA, R5 TO R10 BY ADV. SRI.T.N.MANOJ. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19/07/2011,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.17133/2011-N: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: COPY OF THE SALE DEED IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE PETITIONER DTD. 29/09/2010. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DTD. 08/02/2011. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KODAKARA DTD. 08/02/2011. EXT.P.4: COPY OF THE SALE DEED DOCUMENT NO.440/1/2011 OF THE KALLETUMKARA SUB REGISTRY OFFICE DTD 30/11/2010. EXT.P.5: COPY OF THE SKETCH IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.6: COPY OF THE RECEIPTS ISSUED BY THE KSE BOARD FOR REMITTING AMOUNTS DTD. 24/05/2011. EXT.P.7: COPY OF THE FIR NO.624 REGISTERED BY THE KODAKARA POLICE DTD. 08/05/2011. EXT.P.8: COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL OFFICER DTD. NIL. EXT.P.9: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4 DTD. 08/05/2011. EXT.P.10: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION MADE BY THE PETITIONER TO THE R.4. TO COPY TO OTHERS DTD. 10/06/2011. EXT.P.11: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ANATHADAM PUMP HOUSE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS. EXT.P.12: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE NURSERY BUSINESS ETC. AND FENCING PROVIDED TO THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY. EXT.P.13: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE SURROUNDG PROPERTIES AND THE TEMPORARY SHED. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: EXT.R5.A: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KODAKARA. EXT.R5.B: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BEFORE THE KODAKARA PANCHAYAT PRESIDENT. W.P.(C). NO.17133/2011-N: EXT.R9.A: COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE ANATHADAM KARSHAKA SAMITHY TO THE KODAKARA AGRICULTURAL OFFICER. EXT.R9.B: COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION BY THE ANATHADAM KARSHAKA SAMITHY TO THE KODAKARA AGRICULTURAL OFFICER. EXT.R9.C: COPY OF THE MASS PETITION FILED BEFORE THE PRESIDENT OF KODAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.R9.D: COPY OF THE MASS PETITION FILED BEFORE THE KODAKARA AGRICULTURAL OFFICER. EXT.R9.E: COPY OF THE STOP MEMO ISSUED BY THE KODAKARA AGRICULTURAL OFFICER. EXT.R9.F: COPY OF THE STOP MEMO ISSUED BY THE KODAKARA AGRICULTURAL OFFICER UPON THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE KODAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.R9.G: COPY OF THE LETTER BY THE KODAKARA AGRICULTURAL OFFICER TO THE KODAKARA PANCHAYAT PRESIDENT DTD. 08/07/2011. EXT.R9.H: COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE KODAKARA PANCHAYAT PRESIDENT TO THE S.I OF POLICE KODAKARA POLICE STATION. EXT.R9.I: COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE WRIT PETITIONER BEFORE THE KODAKARA PANCHAYAT PRESIDENT. EXT.R9.J: COPY OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF ASST. ENGINEER LSGD SECTION TO KODAKARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT SECRETARY. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE. Prv. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE & C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JJ. ------------------------------------------- W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 ------------------------------------------- Dated this the 19th day of July, 2011 J U D G M E N T ---------------------- Abdul Rehim, J. Petitioner is the owner in possession of an extent of 44.92 Ares of property situated in Kodakara village in Mukundapuram Taluk which he had purchased by virtue of Ext.P1 sale deed. Ext.P2 basic tax receipt and P3 possession certificate were produced to establish possession of the property by the petitioner. By virtue of Ext.P4 sale deed, the petitioner had purchased right of pathway to the above said property. According to the petitioner, he is conducting a nursery of 'Nutmeg saplings' and producing high yielding variety by way of budding and grafting. It is the case of the petitioner that the property in question was remaining without any cultivation for the last more than 15 years and it is situated very close to a public W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -2- drinking water project established to meet the needs of different parts of the panchayat area. It is contended that the land in question is unsuitable for paddy cultivation and it had even lost the characteristics of a paddy field. According to the petitioner, he had started the nursery project on availing huge amount of financial assistance from the State Bank of Travancore. It is stated that the petitioner is planting Nutmeg saplings in polythene bags and the same is kept in the property for doing the budding, and thereafter the budded saplings will be sold to various nurseries. It is also conceded that in certain portion of the land the petitioner had planted 'plantain', which is now getting ripe for harvest. A temporary shed was also constructed in a corner for keeping the agricultural implements and tools and he had already applied for electric connection for installation of a pump set. 2. Complaint of the petitioner is that the respondents 5 to 10 and their henchmen is making attempts to obstruct W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -3- the activities of the petitioner, because they were using the land in question for gazing cattle and for playing cricket, during summer season. It is stated that the respondents are even making demand for engaging them for the works in the petitioner’s property, or on the alternative for payment of amounts at the rate of Rs.200/- per person, on every day. It is stated that those respondents had caused physical obstruction to the workers of the petitioners and even an employee of the petitioner was assaulted, for which a criminal case has already been registered as evidenced from Ext.P7. 3. The petitioner submitted complaint to respondents 3 and 4 as per Ext.P9. But on coming to know about such complaint 5th respondent started threatening the petitioner with physical attack and causing threat to the life of the petitioner. Ext.P10 is a further complaint submitted in this regard to the 4th respondent. Since no effective steps were taken, this writ petition is filed. W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -4- 4. In the counter affidavit filed by the 5th respondent it is alleged that the petitioner had constructed a house in the property in question without getting permission from the Panchayat and he made several channels in the property to drain out water, which had resulted in putting the nearby agriculturists in a position impossible to conduct paddy cultivations in their fields. The conversion of paddy field is also putting the neighbouring paddy field owners in a difficult situation to continue paddy cultivations. It is further averred that putting up of barbed wire fencing around the property of the petitioner is creating blockage to the pathway used by the neighbouring owners in bringing tractor or tiller to the paddy fields. It is also contended that the petitioner is filling up the paddy field unauthorisedly. It is stated that complaints were submitted in this regard to the Agricultural Officer as well as to the Panchayat, as per Ext.R5(a) and R5(b). It is further complained that the illegal filling up of the paddy field belonging to the W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -5- petitioner had caused threat to usage of water collected in the public pond situated near to the property which is used for water supply distribution. It is stated that the Agricultural Officer had issued a proceedings dt.18.12.2010, directing the petitioner to stop such activities. But ignoring such directions the petitioner is continuing with the illegal activities of filling up of paddy field. However it is conceded that the 5th respondent had not caused any threat to the life or person of the petitioner. 5. Respondents 6 to 10 had filed separate counter affidavit raising more or less similar allegations. According to them, various complaints have been submitted by a group of farmers under the banner of 'Anathadam Karshaka Samithi' to the Agricultural Officer and to the Grama Panchayat. On that basis Ext.R9(e) and R9(f) proceedings were issued by the Agricultural Officer restraining the petitioner from converting the paddy field and also to stop the construction activities being conducted in the property W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -6- in question. 6. Refuting the allegations in the counter affidavits filed by respondents 5 to 10, the petitioner had filed reply affidavit stating that no conversion of paddy field is done in the land in question and that the petitioner has not done anything which will prevent flow of water or causing obstruction or damage to the agricultural operations of any neighbouring lands. It is contended that no paddy cultivation is being done at anywhere near the property of the petitioner and that no tractor or tiller is being brought through the property purchased by the petitioner. The petitioner had produced Ext.P11 to P13 photographs to show that the allegations regarding filling up of land and conversion of the paddy field, are made in a totally baseless manner. 7. In an additional counter affidavit filed by respondents 6 to 10, Ext.R9(g) is produced which is a letter issued by Agricultural Officer to the Grama Panchayat W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -7- requiring to take appropriate actions against the petitioner for putting mud on the land in violation of the provisions contained in the Kerala Conversion of Paddy and Wet Land Act. Ext.R9(h) is the copy of the letter issued by the President of the Grama Panchayat to the 4th respondent requesting to take necessary and appropriate action to demolish the unauthorized construction made by the petitioner in the property in question, and to take steps to stop unauthorized filling up of paddy field. It is also stated that the petitioner is conducting all activities in the property, without obtaining licence from the Grama Panchayat concerned. 8. In the reply affidavit filed by the petitioner it is mentioned that Ext.R9(e) was challenged by the petitioner before this court in WP(C). 19035/11 and on 13.7.2011 this court was pleased to dispose of the writ petition quashing the proceedings observing that the Agricultural Officer has no jurisdiction to take any action on the subject matter. It W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -8- is further stated by the learned counsel that the 4th respondent had not taken any action in view of pendency of this writ petition. 9. Considering the factual situation prevailing as above and also considering the rival contentions on either side, we are of the considered opinion that the disputes could not be resolved in this writ petition and this court is not in a position to adjudicate upon the veracity of the allegations and counter allegations. It is brought to our notice that the stop memo issued by the Agricultural Field Officer has already been quashed by this court. The Grama Panchayat will be at liberty to take action if there is any unauthorized construction made by the petitioner in the property in question. So also, if the petitioner had converted the land in question in violation of the provisions of the Kerala Conversion of Paddy and Wet Land Act or in violation of the Kerala Land Utilization Order, the competent authority under the relevant statutes will be at W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -9- liberty to take appropriate action. 10. However respondents 5 to 10 or anybody claiming under them has no manner of right to trespass into the property of the petitioner and to create any physical obstruction or to cause any threat to the life and person of the petitioner or his workers. If any such physical obstruction is there from the side of respondents 5 to 10 or their henchmen or any other persons claiming similar allegations, it is for the respondents 3 and 4 to take appropriate steps to prevent such actions. The respondents 3 and 4 shall make an enquiry into the alleged threat against the life and person of the petitioner and his workers and take appropriate steps to afford adequate protection. 11. However, we make it cleat that the directions issued to respondents 3 and 4 in this regard will not prevent the competent authority under the relevant statutes from taking any appropriate steps against the petitioner if it is found that there is any violation of such provisions. W.P.(C).No.17133 of 2011 -10- Needless to say that the petitioner will be also at liberty to challenge any such action by resorting to proper procedure contemplated under the law. The writ petition is disposed of with the above directions, subject to the observations made herein above. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. C.K.ABDUL REHIM, JUDGE. okb