IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 4TH JUNE 2009 / 14TH JYAISHTA 1931 WP(C).No. 1248 of 2009(W) -------------------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------- V.V. SUNNY, VALANKIZHIYIL HOUSE, ARAKKULAM P.O., IDUKI DISTRICT. BY ADV. MR.GEORGEKUTTY MATHEW. RESPONDENTS: ------------------------ 1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVNANTHAPURAM,. 2. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, M.V.I.P DIVISION NO.1, THODUPUZHA. R1 & R2 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. M.R. SREELATHA. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 04/06/2009,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). NO.1248/2009-W: APPENDIX PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS: EXT.P.1: PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING LAND SLIDING IN THE LAND OF THE PETITIONER. EXT.P.2: COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 29/08/2008 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE R.2. EXT.P.3: COPY OF THE LETTER DTD. 07/10/2008 ISSUED BY THE R.2. TO THE PETITIONER. RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL. //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE. Prv. V.GIRI, J. --------------------------- W.P.(C) No.1248 of 2009 --------------------------- Dated this the 4th day of June, 2009 JUDGMENT The petitioner's grievance is a peculiar one, inasmuch as, according to him, the agricultural land belonging to him, extending to 3 acres comprised in Survey No.332/2 in Arakkulam Village, which is lying by the side of M.V.I.P., Malamkara Water Reservoir. is facing serious erosion on account of large quantity of water being stored by the 2nd respondent in the reservoir and consequent land sliding in the portions of the land adjacent to the reservoir. The remedy, evening according to the petitioner is construction of retaining walls and upon a representation made by the petitioner, the officials of the Minor Irrigation Department inspected the property and were convinced that such protection walls had to be constructed. 2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent. Paragraphs 2, 3 and 4 of the statement reads: “2. The petitioner's property is lying along the river side boundary Reservoir. The bank of the river makes, boundary with the petitioner's property have been slided and trees uprooted. No W.P.(C)No.1248 of 2009 :: 2 :: deliberate inaction has been made by the department as alleged by the petitioner. Soon on receipt of the petition dated 9.11.2007, the department has conducted site inspection, prepared an estimate for Rs.9,00,000/- (Rupees Nine Lakhs only) and proposal submitted to the Superintending Engineer, Project Circle, Muvattupuzha for inclusion in the action plan for 2008-2009. Due to paucity of funds, the work was not included in the action plan for 2008- 2009. On the basis of the representation of the petitioner dated 29.9.2008, the departmental authorities inspected the site and prepared a detailed estimate for Rs.11,00,000/- (Rupees Eleven Lakhs only) for the construction of a protection wall along the reservoir portion of the petitioner's property. The estimate has already been submitted to the higher authorities for complying departmental formalities vide this office letter No.A5.1221/08 dated 31.12.2008. Necessary action is being taken to include the work in the current year's action plan (2009-2010) W.P.(C)No.1248 of 2009 :: 3 :: and to construct the retaining wall near the petitioner's property. 3. The department has already initiated action, as mentioned the above paragraph to resolve the issue. 4. Based on the representation dated 29.8.2008, the department has taken speedy and effective steps, such as inspection of the site, preparation of the detailed estimate, submission of the estimate for inclusion of the work in the action plan for 2009-2010. The work will be started soon on receipt of sanction and funds from the higher authorities.” 3. From the above statement, it is clear that the respondents have initiated action on the petitioner's request. The petitioner's request has been included the new action plan 2008-09. All that is necessary is to see that the respondents proceed further. Accordingly, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to take such action, as is necessary to see that the work of construction of protection wall along the required portion of the property of the petitioner is included in the action plan 2008-09 and W.P.(C)No.1248 of 2009 :: 4 :: see that the needful work is done to avoid further damage to the petitioner's property. Once the work is so included in the action plan, then it shall be done in accordance with the allocation of action plan 2009-10. Sd/- V.GIRI) Judge sk/ //true copy//