IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.S.GOPINATHAN WEDNESDAY, THE 25TH MARCH 2009 / 4TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 329 of 2009(L) ------------------------ PETITIONER(S): --------------- POORAM RESIDENCY HOTEL INDIA PVT., LTD, PO AMMADAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT,REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, SATHYAVRATHAN, S/O.KUTTAPPAN, CHELIPARAMBIL HOUSE, PALLISSERY DESOM, ARATTUPUZHA VILLAGE, THRISSUR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.M.N.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.SAJU.S.A RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MANOJ, S/O.RAMAN, MARATH HOUSE, KODANNOOR DESOM, KODANNOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DIST. 2. JIJESH, S/O.VELAYUDHAN,MARATH HOUSE, KODANNOOR DESOM, KODANNOOR VILLAGE, THRISSUR DIST. 3. K.K.MANI, MEMBER WARD III, PARALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KODANNOOR DESOM, KODANNOOR VILLAGE, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 4. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERPU POLICE STATION, THRISSUR DISTRICT. 5. THE CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHERPU POLICE STATION, CHERPU. ADDL.R6 AND R7 ARE IMPLEADED VIDE ORDER DT. 23.1.2009 IN IA 956 OF 2009. ADDL.R6. THE SENIOR ENGINEER, POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD, THRISSUR. ADDL.R7. THE SECRETARY, PARALAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH, PARALAM, THRISSUR DISTRICT. ADV. SRI.V.M.SYAM KUMAR FOR R1 & R3 SRI.GEORGE C.VARGHESE FOR R1 & R3 SRI P.A.SALIM, GOVT. PLEADER FOR R4 & 5. SRI.C.A.CHACKO FOR ADDL.R7 SRI.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS, SC, POLL.C.BOAR FOR ADDL.R6. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 25/03/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: P.R. RAMAN & P.S. GOPINATHAN, JJ. ---------------------------------------------- W.P.(C) NO. 329 of 2009 ---------------------------------------------- DATED:MARCH 25, 2009. JUDGMENT Raman, J. The petitioner, after obtaining permit from the Panchayat, is constructing a hotel building at Ammdam, Thrissur District. Alleging illegal obstruction at the instance of respondents 1 to 3, a police complaint was made, but it was not acted upon. Hence this writ petition for appropriate direction. 2. Respondents 1 to 3 entered appearance and filed a detailed counter affidavit alleging that the digging of a bore well in the property of the petitioner has seriously affected the ground water level of their property and thereby they are adversely affected. However, it is maintained that they are not causing any physical obstruction or using any force. 3. The Panchayath and the Pollution Control Board were impleaded as additional parties. According to them, they have no complaint against the proposed construction. 4. In the factual situation, when there is no physical obstruction caused by respondents 1 to 3, there is no need to W.P.(C) NO. 329 of 2009 :2: issue any direction to the police if the respondents maintain their promise. But, in case of any physical obstruction, necessarily the police will have to remove such physical obstruction. As regards the civil rights, if any, of respondents 1 to 3, it is open to them to approach the civil court, if they are so advised, and in case any order of injunction is obtained against the petitioner, necessarily the police will have to abide by such orders. The 4th respondent is directed to give necessary protection to the petitioner after the expiry of two weeks if the alleged threat or physical obstruction still continues. Two weeks' time is thus granted to respondents 1 to 3 to work out their remedy, if there is any real threat of their property being affected by any action on the part of the petitioner. Produce a copy of this order before the 4th respondent for information and compliance. P.R. RAMAN, JUDGE. P.S. GOPINATHAN, JUDGE. mt/-