IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI FRIDAY, THE 28TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 7TH AGRAHAYANA 1930 WP(C).No. 34329 of 2008(J) -------------------------- PETITIONER: --------------- THE KERALA STATE HOUSING BOARD, SANTHI NAGAR, TRIVANDRUM, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. BY ADV. SRI.A.JAYASANKAR, SC KSHB, TVM RESPONDENTS: --------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE CORPORATION OF COCHIN, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PARK AVENUE, ERNAKULAM, COCHIN. 3. THE GREATER COCHIN DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KADAVANTHRA, ERNAKULAM. 4. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM. ADV. SRI.M.K.CHANDRAMOHAN DAS,SC,COCHIN COPN FOR R2 SRI.P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON, SC,GCDA FOR R3 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI,J. ------------------------- W.P ( C) No.34329 of 2008 -------------------------- Dated this the 28th November, 2008 J U D G M E N T An extent of 12.46 acres of land which was originally redeemed from the Bharat Petroleum Corporation was assigned in favour of the Kerala State Housing Board under Exhibit P1 order dated 15.3.2003. It seems that Government later approved a project submitted by the petitioner for construction of Eco Township in Kochi. A larger extent of land was assigned for the same purpose as evidenced by Exhibit P3 and Patta was also issued in relation to the same as per Exhibit P4. According to the petitioner, there is another piece of land lying adjacent to the property covered by Exhibit P1 belonging to the 3rd respondent. They have been constructing a basement for a compound wall along the sides of the canal near the northern side of the petitioner’s property. Petitioner submits that there is a public road constructed by the 2nd respondent- corporation at the instance of the District W.P ( C) No.34329 of 2008 2 Collector which runs through one portion of the petitioner’s property. Apprehending that the construction of the compound wall undertaken by the 3rd respondent will result in obstruction to the use of the road. Petitioner has filed Exhibit P8 representation before the District Collector pointing out these aspects. This writ petition has been filed seeking a direction to the GCDA, 3rd respondent not to undertake the construction of the compound wall in such a manner that it creates some obstruction to the user of the road running through the petitioner’s property. There is also a prayer to the District Collector to consider Exhibit P8. 2. I heard Sri. Manu Govind, learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri. P.R.Ramachandra Menon, learned standing counsel appearing for the GCDA and Sri.M.K.Chandra Mohan Das, learned standing counsel appearing for the Kochi Corporation. 3. In my view, taking note of the fact that the dispute is between the petitioner- Housing Board and the 3rd respondent both of which are statutory bodies the same W.P ( C) No.34329 of 2008 3 may be decided by the District Collector. It is only appropriate that the District Collector looks into Exhibit P8 and takes a decision thereon. This shall be done without further delay on production of a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (V.GIRI,JUDGE) ma W.P ( C) No.34329 of 2008 4 W.P ( C) No.34329 of 2008 5