IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.CHELAMESWAR & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN FRIDAY, THE 25TH JUNE 2010 / 4TH ASHADHA 1932 WA.No. 321 of 2010() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.3323/2010 Dated 17/02/2010 .................... APPELLANT(S): PETITIONER ------------------------ SMT.T.N.LEELA,W/O.LATE VASUDEVAN NAIR, AGED 60 YEARS,THANDANIL HOUSE,EAST KALOOR KARA, KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE,THODUPUZHA TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.V.GEORGE SRI.JIMMY GEORGE (THADATHIL) RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS/ADDL.RESPONDENTS ------------------------------------------- 1. DISTRICT PROJECT OFFICER,SARVA SIKSHA ABHIYAN,DISTRICT OFFICE,PAINAVU DISTRICT. 2. BLOCK PROJECT OFFICER,SARVA SIKSHA ABHIYAN,BLOCK PROJECT OFFICE,THODUPUZHA. 3. HEADMISTRESS,GOVERNMENT LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL,EAST KALOOR,KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE, THODUPUZHA TALUK. 4. PRESIDENT,PARENT TEACHER ASSOCIATION, GOVERNMENT LOWER PRIMARY SCHOOL,EAST KALOOR, KUMARAMANGALAM VILLAGE,THODUPUZHA TALUK. 5. STATE OF KERALA,REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO PWD DEPARTMENT,GOVT.SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF EDUCATION, THODUPUZHA.P.O,IDUKKI. WA.No. 321 of 2010 : 2 : 7. ASST.EDUCATIONAL OFFICER,THODUPUZHA. 8. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GENERAL EDUCATION,GOVT.SECRETARIAT,TRIVANDRUM. 9. KUMARAMANGALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,PANCHAYATH OFFICE, KUMARAMANGLAM,THODUPUZHA. ADV. SRI.SIRAJ KAROLY FOR R9 SRI.P.VENUGOPAL (1086/92) FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.BENNY GERVASIS FOR R3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: J.CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. ----------------------------------------- W.A.No.321 of 2010 ----------------------------------------- Dated this the 25th day of June, 2010 JUDGMENT J.Chelameswar,C. J. This is an appeal preferred by the unsuccessful petitioner in W.P. (C)No.3323 of 2010 aggrieved by the judgment dated 17.2.2010. The writ petition was filed with the prayer as follows:- “i) Call for the entire records relating to the above case; ii) Issue a writ of mandamus, or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the respondents not to put up any compound wall on the northern side of the school compound destroying the existing pathway of 3 mtr width, by spending the amount sanctioned by the Central Government under the Sarva Siksha Abhiyan scheme. iii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, direction or order commanding the 5th respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P3 representation on merit at the earliest. iv) Issue a writ of mandamus commanding respondents to put up the compound wall on the northern side of the school compound in East – West direction, only leaving out the age old 3 feet pathway for use of the petitioner and others. v) Grant such other and further reliefs which this Hon'ble Court feels just and proper to grant in the circumstances of the case, including the entire costs of the proceedings.” The substance of the writ petition is that the petitioner, appellant W.A.No.321 of 2010 -:2:- herein, claims a right of passage through the property over which a Government Lower Primary School (3rd respondent) exists. In other words, the appellant/petitioner claims a right of easement and from the pleadings it appears that the appellant claims such easement by way of a prescription. Whether the appellant has such a right of easement or not depends upon establishment of various facts which are required only to be decided on the basis of evidence in an appropriate proceeding before the appropriate forum. The forum under Article 226 of the Constitution of India is wholly unsuitable for the adjudication of such issues. 2. By the judgment under appeal the learned Judge of this Court disposed of the writ petition directing the Government to take a decision on Ext.P6, a representation made by the appellant/petitioner, but declined to grant any other reliefs as prayed for by the appellant/petitioner. We do not see any reason to interfere with the judgment under appeal in the background of the above mentioned facts. The appeal is accordingly dismissed. J.CHELAMESWAR, Chief Justice P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge. ahg. J.CHELAMESWAR, C.J. & P.N.RAVINDRAN, J. --------------------------- W.A.No.321 of 2010 ---------------------------- JUDGMENT 25th June, 2010