IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC MONDAY, THE 22ND NOVEMBER 2010 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA 1932 WP(C).No. 34175 of 2010(V) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- NUJUMUDEEN Y., S/O.YOUSUF KUNJU, SABEENA MANZIL, KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.SUJESH MENON V.B. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM, PIN-691 001. 2. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, KOLLAM-691 001. 3. THE ASST. EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PWD ROADS SUB DIVISION, PUNALOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 305. 4. THE ASST. ENGINEER, PWD ROADS SECTION, ANCHAL, KOLLAM DISTRICT, 691 306. 5. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KULATHUPUZHA, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 310. 6. A.ABDUL SALIM, CONGRESS MANDALAM PRESIDENT, WHITE HOUSE, KULATHUPUZHA, PATHANAPURAM TALUK, KOLLAM-691 310. 7. TOM, SECRETARY, DYFI VILLAGE COMMITTEE, KULATHUPUZHA, 691 310. 8. VASUDEVAN, BJP PUNALOOR ASSEMBLY MANDALAM SECRETARY, CHALIL VEEDU, KULATHUPUZHA, THINKALKARIKKAKAM VILLAGE, PATHANAPURAM TALUK - 691 310. R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 22/11/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 34175 OF 2010 ===================== Dated this the 22nd day of November, 2010 J U D G M E N T Petitioner submits that he is the owner of a property having an extent of 8.5 cents, which he purchased as per Ext.P1 sale deed. The property has a building, which contains 6 shop rooms. According to the petitioner, in front of the petitioner's property in Thiruvananthapuram, Schenkotta, PWD Road at Kulathupuzha Town, 6th respondent constructed a Martyrs' monument and respondents 7 and 8 erected a flag post. It is the case of the petitioner that the constructions were made illegally and without obtaining any permission from any one of the authorities. According to the petitioner, realising that the aforesaid is an unauthorised construction, the 3rd respondent has issued Ext.P7 letter to the 4th and 5th respondents, stating that the unauthorised construction is in the PWD road and that the junction being a congested area, the construction has to be demolished. On this basis, though police protection was sought for, according to the petitioner, there was no response from the 5th respondent. It is in the aforesaid circumstances, the writ petition is filed seeking a WPC No. 34175/10 :2 : direction to respondents 1 to 5 for removal of the unauthorised construction. 2. Although notice has been served by special messenger on respondents 6 to 8, there is no appearance or representation on their behalf. 3. I heard the learned Government Pleader on behalf of the official respondents. Learned Government Pleader confirms the correctness of Ext.P7 relied on by the petitioner. If that be so, according to the authorities, the construction in question is an unauthorised one and is one which required to be removed. 4. In the light of the aforesaid facts, this writ petition is disposed of directing that respondents 3 to 5 will ensure that the unauthorised construction mentioned in Ext.P7 is removed. This shall be done, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within 4 weeks of production of a copy of this judgment. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment before the respondents 3 to 5 for compliance. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp