IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD JUNE 2010 / 2ND ASHADHA 1932 WP(C).No. 2228 of 2010(C) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MUKRINAKATH HAMSA HAJI, SABIRA MANZIL, PUZHAKKARA, AYYAPPANKAVU, VILAKKODE POST, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.M.SASINDRAN SRI.V.VENUGOPAL RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE SECRETARY, MUZHAKKUNNU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MUZHAKKUNNU P.O., KANNUR. 2. THE MUZHAKKUNNU GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MUZHAKKUNNU, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. EERADATHU MAYAN, EERADATHU HOUSE, VILAKKODE P.O., THALASSERY, KANNUR. ADDL. R4: THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYATS, KANNUR. (ADDL. R4 IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT.23.6.2010 IN IA NO.8303/2010) ADV. SRI.C.P.PEETHAMBARAN FOR R1 &2 SRI.SUNNY MATHEW FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 23/06/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: APPENDIX EXT.P1-TRUE COPY OF NEWSPAPER REPORTS DATED 5.7.2009 EXT.P1(A) DO. DO. EXT.P2-TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONR BEFORE R1 DT.12.5.2009 EXT.P3-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT.6.6.2009 ISSUED BY R1 TO THE PETITIONER's EXT.P4-TRUE COPY OF REPLY DATED 26.6.09 BY THE PETITIONER TO R1 EXT.P5-TRUE COPY OF LETTER DT.6.7.2009 SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE R1 EXT.P6-TRUE COPY OF REPORT SUBMITTED BY VILLAGE OFFICER TO RDO EXT.P6(A)-TRUE COPY OF SKETCH OF THE PROPERTY EXT.P7-TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT IN WPC 19818/2009 DT.15.7.2009 EXT.P8-TRUE COPY OF ENQUIRY REPORT SUBMITTED BY R1 DT.25.7.2009 EXT.P9-TRUE COPY OF REPORT OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER DT.5.8.2009 TO R1 EXT.P10-TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS OF THE MEETING HELD ON 12.8.2009 EXT.P11-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY R1 DT.10.8.09 TO RDO EXT.P12-TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY R1 EXT.P13-TRUE COPY OF REPORT SUBMITTED BY AUDIT SUPERVISOR DT.26.8.2009 TO DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE // TRUE COPY // P.S. TO JUDGE T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.2228 of 2010-C - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2010. JUDGMENT The main complaint raised in the writ petition is that by the construction of a compound wall made by the third respondent, the width of a water stream got reduced from 3 feet to 1 feet. This has resulted in blocking of water in the residential property of the petitioner. 2. The petitioner is residing in ther property comprised in R.S. No.18/3 of Thalassery Taluk in Muzhakkunnu Village. The said property is situated on the side of a Panchayat road, viz. Kunnathoor - Vilakkode road which is proceeding from Iritty-Peravoor road. The third respondent is having a residential building on the western side of the petitioner's property and on the southern side a paddy field belonging to one Anvar is situated. According to the petitioner, from the road 3 feet width water canal has been running up to the thodu situated on the southern side. The third respondent constructed a compound wall reducing its width to 1 feet. In view of the various actions on the part of the third respondent, the petitioner had to approach the first respondent by Ext.P2 representation. It appears that the Secretary of the Panchayat visited the site. It is stated that various wpc 2228/2010 2 inspections by different officers have not resulted in any positive action in favour of the petitioner. Finally, by Ext.P12 the Secretary of the Panchayat communicated a letter to the petitioner. In fact, the Secretary has taken the stand that the widening of the thodu by the third respondent alone may not result in blocking of water in the property of the petitioner. It is pointed out that the petitioner also contributed to the same. Ext.P13 is the report forwarded by the Audit Supervisor of the Permanent Audit Unit - II to the Deputy Director of Panchayats. 3. In the light of the various disputes between the parties, the petitioner is seeking for a direction to the Deputy Director of Panchayats to take a decision in the matter. 4. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 5. In the light of the report forwarded as Ext.P13, there will be a direction to the Additional fourth respondent, viz. the Deputy Director of Panchayats, to conduct due enquiries in the matter, if not already conducted, and take a decision after hearing all the parties, within a period of six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. He can also seek the assistance of the Revenue authorities in the matter for resolving the issue. For enabling the additional fourth respondent to take a decision, Ext.P12 wpc 2228/2010 3 shall stand quashed. The writ petition is disposed of as above. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/