IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE WEDNESDAY, THE 9TH JANUARY 2008 / 19TH POUSHA 1929 WP(C).No. 993 of 2008(R) ------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------ BRIDGET PEREIRA (MRS), W/O. FIDALIS A CRUZ, AGED 77 YEARS, GEORGY DALE, MUNDACKAL, MURUKKUMPUZHA POST, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT BY ADV. SRI.S.JAMES VINCENT RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 2. THE MANGALAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, THONNACKAL POST, MANGALAPURAM, TRIVANDRUM DISTRICT, REP. BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. AJITH KUMAR, PRESIDENT, MANGALAPURAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, DO. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MANGALAPURAM POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT. BY GOVT.PLEADER MR. K.J. MOHAMMED ANZAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/01/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: PIUS C. KURIAKOSE, J. ----------------------------------------------- W.P.(C)No. 993 OF 2008 ----------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 9TH JANUARY, 2008 J U D G M E N T The apprehension which is expressed by the petitioner through this writ petition is that she will be forcibly dispossessed of the properties belonging to her under the guise of road widening. When a notice was issued to the Panchayath, the Secretary of the Panchayath sent Ext.P5 reply. In Ext.P5 reply it is stated that the Panchayath does not intend to widen any village road at all. Mr.James Vincent, counsel for the petitioner submits that despite the issuance of Ext.P5, widening of the road from other end of the roads already started. Considering the stand taken by the Panchayath in Ext.P5, I feel that the petitioner's remedy lies before a competent civil court. Obviously it is not the Panchayath which is going ahead with the widening work. But the petitioner herself has alleged that the third respondent who is the President of the Panchayath is spearheading the widening work. WP(C)No. 993/2008. -2- Under these circumstances,even as I dispose of this writ petition relegating the petitioner to the remedy from a civil court, there will be a direction to the respondents and the petitioner to maintain status quo as obtaining today regarding the petitioner's property for a period of five weeks. The writ petition is disposed o as above. (PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE) ks. WP(C)No. 993/2008. -3-