IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN MONDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2011/21ST AGRAHAYANA 1933 WA.No. 1767 of 2011 ( ) ======================= (AGAINST JUDGMENT DATED 17/06/2011 IN WP(C) NO.15660/2011) APPELLANT(S)/STRANGER ============ ABDUL MANAF.P.I., AGED 32 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM, PUTHUVAYIL, COCHIN UNIVERSITY.P.O., KALAMASSERRY, ERNAKULAM. BY ADV.SRI.BABU KARUKAPADATH SMT.M.A.VAHEEDA BABU SRI.JAGAN GEORGE SRI.P.G.PRAMOD RESPONDENT(S)/ PETITIONERS AND RESPONDENTS 1 TO 4 ============= 1. DR.DAVID PETER.S., PRESIDENT, PARENT TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI - 682 022. 2. DR.D.RAJEEV, VICE PRESIDENT, PARENTS TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI - 682 022. 3. V.DAMODARAN, SECRETARY, PARENTS TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, SCHOOL OF ENGINEERING, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI - 682 022. 4. COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI - 682 022, REPRESENTED BY ITS REGISTRAR. 5. THE REGISTRAR, COCHIN UNIVERSITY OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, KOCHI - 682 022. W.A.NO.1767/2011 6. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM. 7. THE COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, KOCHI CITY. *ADDL.R8 SASI, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.GOPALAN, ITHAPPILLY HOUSE, COCHIN UNIVERSITY.P.O., KALAMASSERRY, ERNAKULAM. *ADDL.R9 SIDHIK.O.K., AGED 34 YEARS, S/O.KHADER, PATHUPPULLIL HOUSE, COCHIN UNIVERSITY.P.O., KALAMASSERRY, ERNAKULAM. *ADDL.R10 SURESH KUMAR, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.BHASKARAN NAIR, MADATHIL PUTHENPURA HOUSE, COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM. *ADDL.R11 SAKEER HUSSAIN, AGED 41 YEARS, S/O.PAREED, MOLATH HOUSE, COCHIN UNIVERSITY.P.O., KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM. *ADDL.R12 ABDUL JABBAR, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.IBRAHIM, PUTHUVAYIL, COCHIN UNIVERSITY P.O., KALAMASSERRY, ERNAKULAM. *ADDL.R13 ANIL KUMAR, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O.AYYAPPAN, MANNOPULLIMUKAL HOUSE, COCHIN UNIVERSITY.P.O., KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM. *ADDL.R14 ABDUL HAKKIM, AGED 40 YEARS, S/O.ABOOBACKER, KARUVALLY.P.O., COCHIN UNIVERSITY.P.O., KALAMASSERY, ERNAKULAM. *(ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS 8 TO 14 ARE IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 12/12/2011 IN I.A.NO.859/2011 IN W.A.NO.1767/2011) BY ADV.SRI.S.P.ARAVINDAKSHAN PILLAI,SC,COCHI U MR.T.T.MUHAMOOD, GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR.JULIAN XAVIER FOR R1 TO R3 THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-12-2011 , ALONG WITH WA. 1815/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.A.NO.1767/2011 APPENDIX APPELLANT'S EXHIBITS ANNEXURE-A : COPY OF COUNTER AFFIDAVIT DATED 24/08/2011 FILED BY THE KALAMASSERY MUNICIPALITY IN WP(C) NO.21201/2011. ANNEXURE-B : COPY OF ORDER DATED 09/11/2011 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT IN CONTEMPT CASE (CIVIL NO.996/2011). ANNEXURE-C : COPY OF LETTER DATED 14/11/2011 ISSUED BY THE REGISTRAR OF THE UNIVERSITY TO THE SECRETARY, KALAMASSERY MUNICIPALITY. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR & K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JJ. .................................................................... W.A. Nos.1767 & 1815 of 2011 .................................................................... Dated this the 12th day of December, 2011. J U D G M E N T Ramachandran Nair, J. These Writ Appeals are filed against the very same judgment of the learned Single Judge permitting the Cochin University to close unauthorised openings to the University campus. While W.A.No.1815/2011 is filed by the Kalamassery Municipality within whose area the University is located, the other Writ Appeal is filed by a local resident partially challenging the judgment of the learned Single Judge. During the last posting we felt that there is a need to provide an access to the public through a narrow pathway to reach the School, College and Dispensary situated in the opposite side of the University campus. Accordingly, the Municipality was directed to find out whether the right of way is enjoyed by local residents several in number living in one side of the University campus to reach the other side, where the W.A.Nos.1767 & 1815/2011 2 Dispensary, School and College are located. Admittedly, as of now, local public are using a road on the side of the property of the Water Authority located in the University Campus and other 70 metres pathway over the University's property. Sketch produced in the Court clearly discloses that construction of 70 metres compound wall on one side of the University property will solve the entire problem. So far as the University is concerned, it has to only provide space of 3 metres width and 70 metres length for the Municipality to construct the compound wall at their own cost. The compound wall has to be constructed in continuation of the compound wall constructed and retained by the University and necessarily the Municipality has to construct it in the same design and hight for the 70 metres length. 2. The University's counsel requested for further time to get instructions and to file objection. According to the counsel, new Syndicate is being constituted and at that level the matter is to be considered. However, we do not think the W.A.Nos.1767 & 1815/2011 3 University can raise any objection against the right of way of the local public to reach from one side where they are residing to the opposite side where the College, Dispensary and the School are situated. Admittedly, the right of way was being enjoyed by the public for long. 3. The Municipality represents public interest and i.e. the reason why they have filed separate appeal challenging the judgment for modifying the judgment of the learned Single Judge. In fact what we notice is that the need to retain the right of way to the public was not an issue raised before the learned Single Judge, and if brought to the notice of the learned Single Judge, in our view, the relief that we are granting would have been granted by the learned Single Judge himself. 4. What we notice is that the right of way is enjoyed by the people for the last several decades even after establishment of the educational institutions by the University. The University has permitted right of way over 70 metres W.A.Nos.1767 & 1815/2011 4 property for the people to reach the other side, where Dispensary, School and College are located. The fact that large number of people residing on the one side of the University property is using the right of way over the University's property cannot be contested by the University. The minimum sacrifice that the University has to put is only land, which is only 3 metres width and 70 metres length. The Municipality agreed to construct the compound wall at their own cost to protect the University campus. Therefore, we see no reason for the University to raise any objection against the same. 5. We, therefore, dispose of the Writ Appeals by modifying the judgment of the learned Single Judge as follows:- The University is free to close all unauthorised openings of it's campus except the right of way enjoyed by the people over 70 metres property from the campus of the Water Authority, the office of which is located in the University campus. The W.A.Nos.1767 & 1815/2011 5 Municipality will construct a compound wall of 70 metres length leaving 3 metre wide passage for the public to reach the other side to go to the Dispensary, School and the College. The work will be completed by the Municipality within one month from receipt of this judgment. These Writ Appeals are disposed of by modifying the judgment of the learned Single Judge to the above extent. (C.N.RAMACHANDRAN NAIR, JUDGE) (K.VINOD CHANDRAN, JUDGE) jg