IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE R.BASANT & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.SURENDRA MOHAN TUESDAY, THE 1ST MARCH 2011 / 10TH PHALGUNA 1932 WP(C).No. 5639 of 2011(D) ------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- T.S.RAMACHANDRAN, TEJUS HOUSE, PAZHAKULAM WEST, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.RINNY STEPHEN CHAMAPARAMPIL SMT.ASHA ELIZABETH MATHEW RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE, DY.S.P. OFFICE, ADOOR. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, C.I. OFFICE, ADOOR. 3. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, POLICE STATION, ADOOR. 4. ISSAC PAPPADIMUKALIL, PAZHAKULAM WEST, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR TALUK. 5. RAJU, PAPPADIMUKALIL, PAZHAKULAM WEST, PALLICKAL VILLAGE, ADOOR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.CHARISMA FOR R1 TO R3 ADV. SRI.K.SASIKUMAR FOR R4 &5 SMT.T.SUDHA DEVI FOR R4&5 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 01/03/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P(C) No.5639 of 2011 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT DATED 22.11.2008. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 22.12.2008 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE SECRETARY OF PAZHAKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PLAN APPROVED BY THE SECRETARY OF PAZHAKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 27.12.2008 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.02.2009 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN W.P (C) NO.5870 OF 2009. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE MAHAZAR SUBMITTED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALLICKAL BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY OF THE LOCATION SKETCH SUBMITTED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALLICKAL BEFORE RDO, ADOOR. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 09.03.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALLICKAL BEFORE RDO, ADOOR. EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 30.03.09 OF THIS COURT IN W.P(C) NO.9234 OF 2009. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT.09.06.09 OF THIS COURT IN CONTEMPT OF COURT CSE NO.553/09. EXT.P11: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DT.27.07.09 OF THIS COURT IN CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) NO.553/2009. EXT.P12: TRUE COPY OF THE ODER DATED 03.08.09 OF THIS COURT IN CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL) NO.553/2009. EXT.P13: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 06.08.09 ISSUED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR. EXT.P14: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DT.14.09.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALLICKAL. EXT.P15: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 22.10.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P16: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 26.10.2009. EXT.P17: TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 09.12.2010 OF THIS COURT IN WP(C) NO.31016/09. W.P(C) No.5639 of 2011 - 2 - EXT.P18: TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 04.02.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P19: TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 05.02.2011 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P20: TRUE COPY OF REPRESENATION DATED 31.01.2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.D.O, ADOOR. EXT.P21: TRUE COPY OF A RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER BY R.D.O, ADOOR. /true copy/ R.BASANT & K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JJ. *********************** W.P(C) No.5639 of 2011-D ***************************** Dated this the 1st day of March, 2011 JUDGMENT BASANT, J. Petitioner wants to construct a residential building for which he obtained Ext.P13 permission from the Revenue Divisional Order. When the petitioner undertook the work in pursuance of Ext.P13, there was a dispute about the manner in which Ext.P13 is complied with. The party respondents herein, ie. respondents 4 and 5 along with another came to this Court with W.P(c) No.31016 of 2009 complaining that Ext.P13 is not being strictly complied with. The learned Single Judge by Ext.P17 judgment considered all the contentions and ultimately issued the following direction which is incorporated in para.10 of Ext.P17. We extract the same below: “10. The writ petition is therefore disposed of, directing the first respondent to ensure that the 7th respondent removes earth strictly in compliance with the conditions of Ext.P10 order of the RDO.” 2. The petitioner's grievance is that even after Ext.P17 is passed, the petitioner is not being permitted to carry out the work in pursuance of Ext.P13. W.P(C) No.5639 of 2011-D 2 3. Party respondents herein, ie. respondents 4 and 5, accept that they are bound by Ext.P17. They have no objection in the direction extracted above being implemented. Their grievance is only that in the attempt to implement that direction, the petitioner herein may go beyond Ext.P13 and beyond the specific directions in Ext.P17. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner shall comply with Ext.P13 and implement the same strictly in accordance with Ext.P17. 4. Virtually we find that there is no dispute between the parties. The party respondents, ie. respondents 4 and 5, apprehend that the petitioner may not comply strictly with the directions in Ext.P13 as insisted by Ext.P17. We do not think that there is any need for confusion. The learned Single Judge had specifically directed the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor, to ensure that the petitioner herein removes earth strictly in compliance with Ext.P13 order passed by the 1st respondent. 5. We are, in these circumstances, satisfied that police protection can be ordered to the petitioner to implement Ext.P13 in strict compliance with the directions in Ext.P13 as ordered in Ext.P17. The learned counsel for the contesting respondents submits that the Revenue Divisional Officer may be directed to ensure that W.P(C) No.5639 of 2011-D 3 the petitioner removes earth strictly in accordance with terms of Ext.P13 to which reference has been made in para.8 of Ext.P17. We have no reason to assume that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor, will not comply with the specific directions in Ext.P17. 6. This Writ Petition is, in these circumstances, allowed. Police protection shall be afforded to the petitioner herein by respondents 1 to 3 to implement Ext.P13 in strict compliance with Ext.P17 order. The Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor, shall ensure strict compliance with the directions of Ext.P13 as insisted by Ext.P17. Respondents 1 to 3 shall afford protection to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor, to implement the directions to him in para.10 of Ext.P17 extracted above. (R.BASANT, JUDGE) (K.SURENDRA MOHAN, JUDGE) rtr/