IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON FRIDAY, THE 3RD APRIL 2009 / 13TH CHAITHRA 1931 WP(C).No. 21316 of 2007(K) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. SHALLY JOHN, D/O JOHN, AGED 38 YEARS, PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED AND MENTALLY RETARDED REP. BY HER FATHER JOHN JOSEPH, PUTHAYATHUMOLEL HOUSE, S/O JOSEPH, MANNAMKANDAM, ADIMALY P.O., IDUKKI. 2. JOBY JOHN, S/O JOHN, AGED 27 YEARS, PHYSICALLY HANDICAPPED & MENTALLY RETARDED REP. BY HIS FATHER JOHN JOSEPH, PUTHAYATHUMOLEL HOUSE, S/O JOSEPH, MANNAMKANDAM, ADIMALI P.O., IDUKKI. BY ADV. MR.JOSE J.MATHAIKAL RESPONDENT(S): -------------------------- 1. THE SUB COLLECTOR, OFFICE OF THE SUB COLLECTOR, DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 2. ADIMALI GRAMAPANCHAYATH, ADIMALY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 3. C.K.BABU, S/O KUNJU, CHERUVAZHATHOTTAM, KURUSUPARAKARA, ADIMALI, IDUKKI DISTRICT. 4. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADVS. MR.P.GEORGE VARGHESE FOR R3 MR.LATHEESH SEBASTIAN FOR R2 GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.M.P.SREEKRISHNAN FOR R1 & 4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03/04/2009 , THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) NO. 21316/2007 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1:- COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF P1 . P2:- COPY OF THE MEDICAL CERTIFICATE IN RESPECT OF P2. P3:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS. 226/98 OF MUNSIFF COURT. P4:- COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DT. 4.8.06. P5:- COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DT. 18.3.98 ISSUED BY THE SUB COLLECTOR. P6:- COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DT. 7.11.06. P7:- COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE SUB COLLECTOR . P8:- COPY OF THE ROUGH SKETCH. TRUE COPY P.S. TO JUDGE TSS P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, J. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ W.P.(C) No. 21316 of 2007 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 3rd day of April, 2009 J U D G M E N T Petitioners are physically handicapped as well as mentally challenged persons, suffering a permanent disability of 60 % and 80 % respectively as borne from Ext.P1 and Ext.P2. The petitioners, who wanted to stand on their own legs, approached the authorities concerned for permission to put up a bunk in the purampokku land near Adimali town. Pursuant to favourable orders obtained by their father, they were conducting such petty business by placing bunk in the above property with the financial assistance provided by the Adimali Janakshema Samithy. But quite unfortunately, it was set fire by some miscreants way back in 1997 2. The petitioners submit that objection is now being caused from the part of the 3rd respondent whose property is situated nearby, despite having separate access to the road from his property. It is stated that one Suresh, who is also a neighbour, who according to the petitioners was the person behind setting fire to the bunk shop of the petitioners, had filed O.S. 226/2007 seeking permanent prohibitory injunction against the petitioners from putting up bunk in the purampokku land and an interim injunction was granted by the court. Subsequently, the interim injunction was vacated and the suit was dismissed with cost to the defendants, as borne by W.P.(C) No. 21316 of 2007 -:2:- Ext.P3. Thereafter, the petitioners approached the first respondent by filing Ext.P4 representation for permission to reinstall the bunk in the concerned property and because of the delay in considering the matter, they approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) 24476 of 2006, which culminated in Ext.P6 judgment directing the first respondent to consider the case of the petitioners in a sympathetic manner. 3. Pursuant to the above verdict, the first respondent, taking the direction given by this Court in its right spirit and perspective, passed Ext.P7 order observing that installation of the bunk in the particular spot would be against the larger interest of the general public and hence alternate space was suggested, to be alloted to the petitioner. It is however stated in Ext.P7 that alternate site ( immediately on the western and eastern side of the disputed spot), was stated as not acceptable to the petitioners. Despite this, the first respondent decided to give necessary instruction to the concerned local authority (second respondent Grama Panchayath ) to find out suitable alternate place so as to permit the petitioners to install the bunk as ordered in Ext.P7. The case of the petitioners is that despite the above order, the Panchayath has not taken any steps which made them to approach this Court by filing the present Writ Petition. 4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the reliefs W.P.(C) No. 21316 of 2007 -:3:- sought for stand confined to the alternative prayer as contained in 'prayer 4' for directing the second respondent Panchayath to pursue further steps as directed in Ext.P7 order passed by the first respondent. In the said circumstances, the petitioners are permitted to file detailed representation before the second respondent to have Ext.P7 implemented forthwith. If any such petition is filed within two weeks, the second respondent Panchayath shall consider the same as directed in Ext.P7 and pass appropriate orders thereon, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners within a further period of three months from the date of receipt of the representation. The writ petition is disposed as above. P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE kmd.