IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN THURSDAY, THE 29TH JULY 2010 / 7TH SRAVANA 1932 WP(C).No. 14802 of 2010(A) ---------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- BHASKARAN, GOVERNMENT CONTRACTOR, SNEHALAYAM, PUTHIYAVILA, VELAMCHIRA, KAYAMKULAM. BY ADV. MR.K.MADHUSOODHANAN NAIR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PATHANAMTHITTA. 2. REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR. ADV. MR. V. MANU – GOVERNMENT PLEADER. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 29/07/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 14802 of 2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: COPY OF JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C)NO.11986 OF 2010 DTD 06.04.2010 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT. EXT.P2: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B3-1844/10 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DTD 23.4.2010. EXT.P3: COPY OF THE ORDER NO.G.O.(MS)NO.85/2010/IND.ISSUED BY THE INDUSTRIES DEPARTMENT ON 05.4.2010. TRUE COPY PA TO JUDGE. S. SIRI JAGAN, J. ------------------------------ W.P.(C) No.14802 OF 2010 ------------------------------- Dated this the 29th day of July, 2010 J U D G M E N T The petitioner has undertaken the work of reclamation of road by filling earth, which road was allegedly damaged by Tsunami disaster. For that he wants to transport earth from Pathanamthitta to Alappuzha District. By Ext.P1 judgment, this court directed the second respondent to take appropriate action considering all aspects of the matter. The petitioner's grievance now is that the second respondent has without applying his mind rejected the application of the petitioner by Ext.P2. The petitioner challenges Ext.P2. 2. I have heard the learned Government Pleader also. The learned Government Pleader would contend that this road is not one destroyed by Tsunami. I am not going into the disputed question. On a reading of Ext.P2, I am satisfied that the second respondent has not considered the matter in its right perspective. He does not appear to have considered the fact that what the W.P.(c)No.14802/10 2 petitioner has been attempting to do is to restore a road which was destroyed whether by Tsunami or otherwise. I am of opinion that the Revenue Divisional Officer should not have rejected the same on such hyper technical contentions. A damaged infrastructure has to be restored at the earliest in the interests of the people of the locality. In the above circumstances, Ext.P2 is quashed. In view of the peculiar circumstances of the case, I direct the District Collector to consider the matter and pass fresh orders. For this, the petitioner shall appear before the first respondent - District Collector on 7.8.2010 on which date the District Collector shall, if it is convenient to him, hear the petitioner and pass appropriate orders in the right perspective. If the date is not convenient to the first respondent, he shall give another convenient date within another week to the petitioner and on the next hearing date, orders shall be passed. The writ petition is disposed of as above. S. SIRI JAGAN, JUDGE acd W.P.(c)No.14802/10 3 W.P.(c)No.14802/10 4