IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC FRIDAY, THE 19TH AUGUST 2011 / 28TH SRAVANA 1933 WP(C).No. 22632 of 2011(D) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ----------------------- GINI GEORGE, AGED 27 YEARS,D/O.GEORGE, POZHOLIPARAMBU HOUSE,MANNAMPETTA, MUKUNDAPURAM TALUK,THRISSUR DT. BY ADV. SRI.C.D.DILEEP RESPONDENT(S): ----------------------- 1. ASSISTANT ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION, MUVATTUPUZHA,ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 661. 2. CHIEF ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS, PUBLIC OFFICE,MUSEUM P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695033. 3. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001. SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH SRI.THOMAS ANTONY, SC THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 19/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.22632/11 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS EXT.P1: TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.2391 DATED 31.5.11 OF THE MUVATTUPUZHA SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE. EXT.P2: TRUE COPY OF THE BACK DOCUMENT NO.3034 DATED 7.10.2009 OF THE EXT.P1 SALE DEED. EXT.P3: TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE FROM 8.8.1996 DATED 4.5.11. EXT.P4: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 10.6.11 SHOWING THE REMITTANCE OF THE TAX PERTAINING TO THE PROPERTY. EXT.P5: TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH of THE PROPERTY PREPARED BY TEHSURVEYOR. EXT.P6: TRUE COPY OF THE PHOGOGRAPH SHOWING THE CONSTRUCTION. EXT.P7: TRUE COPY of THE STOP NOTICE DATED 22.7.11 ISSUED BY THE VALAKAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P8: TRUE COPY OF THE INTERIM ORDER OF THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT DATED 5.8.11 IN WRIT PETITION WPC 21416 OF 2001 B EXT.P9: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 9.8.11 DIRECTING TO REMOVE THE CONSTRUCTION. EXT.P10: TRUE COPY of THE BUILDING PLAN SHOWING THE DISTANCE FROM THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY. //TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE Rp ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 22632 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 19th day of August, 2011 J U D G M E N T Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Government Pleader. 2. In this writ petition, the challenge is against Ext.P9 notice issued by the 1st respondent requiring the petitioner to remove a building which is allegedly constructed encroaching into national highway property. The case of the petitioner is that the property where building is under construction comes within her registered holding and therefore the notice is illegal. 3. In my view, if the petitioner has such an objection to Ext.P9, it is for her to raise the said contention before the 1st respondent and it is thereafter for the 1st respondent to examine the matter and pass orders. Therefore, I direct that Ext.P9 will be treated as a notice and it will be open to the petitioner to file her objection to Ext.P9, which shall be done at any rate within 2 weeks from today. It is directed that if objection is filed as above, 1st respondent will hear the petitioner and pass orders in the matter at any rate within 4 weeks thereafter. Until orders are WPC No. 22632/11 :2 : passed in the matter as above, further proceedings pursuant to Ext.P9 will stand stayed. 4. Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment along with a copy of the writ petition before the 1st respondent for compliance. Writ petition is disposed of as above. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp