IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE T.R.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR TUESDAY, THE 9TH MARCH 2010 / 18TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 7260 of 2010(F) ------------------------------------ PETITIONER: ------------------- KUNJALI HAJI, S/O.MUHAMMAD, EYANAMKUNNEN HOUSE, CHANTHANGOTTU PURAM, WANDOOR, MALAPPURAM. BY ADV. MR.ALEXANDER GEORGE. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PERINTHALMANNA. 3. VILLAGE OFFICER, PAROOR VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT. R1 TO R3 BY GOVT. PLEADER MR. P. NARAYANAN. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09/03/2010,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: prv. T.R. Ramachandran Nair, J. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No. 7260 of 2010-F - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated this the 9th day of March, 2010. JUDGMENT The petitioner is seeking for a direction to the District Collector to pass orders on Ext.P2, a representation submitted stating that the access to the property of the petitioner through a private pathway is being obstructed. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Govt. Pleader. 2. It is the allegation of the petitioner that he is the owner in possession of 5.2 acres of property in Sy. No.78/1 and 78/8 of Poroor Village by virtue of a sale deed bearing No. 271/93 of SRO, Wandoor. It is alleged that the petitioner’s neighbour by name Eni had purchased certain extent of property and constructed a compound wall in such a manner so that the ingress and egress to the petitioner’s property was blocked to some extent. It is stated that the matter was taken up before the Revenue Divisional Officer, who has directed the Village Officer to get a report in the matter. After waiting for some time, the petitioner again approached the District Collector in the matter on the plea that the Revenue Divisional Officer has not taken any action in the matter. 3. A reading of Ext.P2 shows that what is referred to therein is a wpc 7260/2010 2 right of the petitioner to use the pathway which is alleged to be blocked because of the construction made by the person named Eni. It is not clear under what provision of law the petitioner has filed a petition before the District Collector seeking his intervention. It appears that the pathway in question is only a private pathway and the petitioner is claiming a right of way through the same. If that be so, the remedy of the petitioner is to approach the civil court to establish his rights. Apart from that, in this writ petition the petitioner has not impleaded the person who has obstructed the pathway, even though the name is mentioned as Eni. For all these reasons, the writ petition fails and the same is dismissed without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to move the civil court for getting appropriate reliefs. No costs. (T.R. Ramachandran Nair, Judge.) kav/