IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE TUESDAY, THE 4TH MARCH 2008 / 14TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 6026 of 2008(P) ------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ A.SAMIKUTTY, S/O. IMBICHIKUTTY, ARAMBACHALIL HOUSE, VALLAIKODE, KOZHIKODE DIST. BY ADV. SRI.M.GOPIKRISHNAN NAMBIAR RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, OFFICE OF THE CHIEF TOWN PLANNER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. THE SECRETARY, OLAVANNA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MATTARA, CALICUT, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT. 4. TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT, INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. MRS. KUMARI KAMALAM, D/O. P.V.SAMI, KALPAKA, THALI, KOZHIKODE. BY G.P.SRI.K.J.MUHAMMED ANZAR BY ADV. SRI.T.G.RAJENDRAN SRI.P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ---------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 6026 of 2008 ---------------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of March, 2008 JUDGMENT I have heard the submissions of Sri.M.Gopikrishnan Nambiar, the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri.T.G.Rajendran, the learned counsel for the respondents. 2. Sri.Gopikrishnan would submit that on the strength of Ext.P8 order of the Tribunal what the fifth respondent is now doing is put up construction in the property comprised in Survey No.50/2B of Pantheerankavu village, which is not covered by the plan submitted by her and was approved by the local authority. Sri.T.G.Rajendran would submit that in respect of 1.88 acres in Sy.No.50/2B there is a genuine disputes between the parties and the same is now pending before the Land Reforms Appellate Authority, Kozhikode (A.A.No.72/2006) According to the counsel for the petitioner, the proper method for resolving the issue as to whether the fifth respondent is now constructing on the property not covered by the approved plan is to have a measurement of the properties. The petitioner is ready to bear all WPC No.6026/2008 2 the expenses for conducting the measurement and will ensure that the measurement is conducted and the identity of the property where constructions are actually being made is determined within a period of two weeks. 3. My attention was drawn by Sri.T.G.Rajendran to the last sentence in the first paragraph of page No.5 of Ext.P8 order of the Appellate Tribunal. The learned counsel submitted that it has been made clear by the Tribunal that the permit obtained by the appellant does not enable the appellant (5th respondent) to carry out constructions in the property in Survey No.50/2B of Pantheerankavu village. 4. On hearing the above submissions, I enquired of the learned counsel Sri.T.G.Rajendran as to whether the fifth respondent is prepared to suffer an order to the effect that in case the constructions are found to be made in Sy.No.50/2B of Pantheerankavu village, she will be ready to forfeit the constructions in favour of the writ petitioner. The learned counsel submitted that it would be difficult to answer this question without consulting the party. The counsel, however, asserted that the construction presently made are not in WPC No.6026/2008 3 Sy.No.50/2B. According to the learned counsel also the correct method for resolving the issue is to have measurement of the property. 4. The Writ Petition is disposed of modifying the order of the Tribunal to the extent of directing a measurement of the property. The interim order dated 21.2.2008 is modified to the WW extent of clarifying that the said order restrain the fifth respondent's construction in Sy.No.50/2B only and that the same does not restrain her construction in other survey numbers. The petitioner will take all steps immediately to have a measurement of the property so that the identity of the property covered by the permit given to the fifth respondent can be identified. All expenses incurred in that context will be borne by the petitioner. The fifth respondent will render all necessary co- operation in the matter. PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, JUDGE. dpk WPC No.6026/2008 4