IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.M.JOSEPH & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.L.JOSEPH FRANCIS WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH MARCH 2010 / 3RD CHAITHRA 1932 WP(C).No. 9868 of 2010(G) ------------------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ---------------------- P.V.THOMAS, AGED 57, S/O.P.C.VARKEY, PARAPURATH HOUSE, VADAVUCODE VILLAGE, VADAVUCODE KARA, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK. BY ADV. SRI.V.RAJENDRAN (PERUMBAVOOR) SRI.GEORGE VARGHESE KIZHAKKAMBALAM RESPONDENT(S): ------------------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF HOME AFFAIRS, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. CIRCLE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, PUTHENCRUZ POLICE STATION. 3. M.E.CHANDY, S/O.PAILY, MANNULLIL HOUSE, CHOIKARAMUGALKARA, VADAYAMBADI P.O., PUTHENCRUZ. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.M.K.PUSHPALATHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24/03/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: K. M. JOSEPH & M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JJ. -------------------------------------------------- W.P(C). NO. 9868 OF 2010 G --------------------------------------------------- Dated this the 24th March, 2010 JUDGMENT K.M. Joseph, J. Petitioner has approached this Court seeking a mandamus directing the second respondent to provide adequate police protection to the petitioner against the third respondent and his men to level the land extending 1 Acre situated in RS.No.471/15 of Block No.38 of Vadavukode Village. 2. Briefly put, the case of the petitioner is as follows: Petitioner is having an extent of 1 Acre of land in Vadavucode Village. The properties are situated as hilly track. Petitioner decided to construct a residential house. For that purpose, he wanted to bring down the level of the property as that of the southern road. The property is having laterite deposit. For the last three years, he was cutting and removing laterite stones and also excavating soil from the property. It is WPC.9868/2010 G 2 stated that the third respondent is having about ten cents of land on the north-western side of the property of the petitioner. Petitioner started arrangements to level the land. The third respondent obstructed leveling of the land, alleging that excavation of soil will cause damage to his property by loss of lateral support. Petitioner explained the matter to the third respondent that he will not remove soil and he only wanted to level the property. The third respondent filed a Suit as Ext.P2. Along with the Suit, the third respondent also filed an Application for injunction. Petitioner filed Ext.P3 objection. It is stated that the petitioner had already filed an application for building Permit. Ext.P4 is the building Permit. It is stated that there was physical obstruction for carrying out the leveling operation and he filed a petition for police protection before the second respondent. But, the second respondent states that there are civil disputes. Hence the petitioner has approached this Court. 3. We heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the WPC.9868/2010 G 3 learned Government Pleader. We take note of the fact that there is a Suit pending at the instance of the third respondent. We are of the view that the petitioner has remedies before the civil court itself wherein he can seek appropriate orders against the third respondent. Without prejudice to the right of the petitioner to seek redress before the competent civil court, the Writ Petition is disposed of. Sd/= K.M. JOSEPH, JUDGE Sd/= M.L. JOSEPH FRANCIS, JUDGE kbk. // True Copy // PS to Judge