IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI MONDAY, THE 17TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 26TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 32511 of 2008(U) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- MATHEW OUSEPH, PARINGATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE, KOTHAMANGALAM,REPRESENTED BY HIS POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER BABU ELIZAS, AGED 45 YEARS, SON OF ITHAPPIRI, PUTHUSSERIKUDI, KAVALANGAD, KOTHAMANGALAM. BY ADV. SRI.P.RAMAKRISHNAN RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, UDUMBANCHOLA. 2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI AT PAINAVU. BY GP SRI.D.ANILKUMAR THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J ------------------- W.P.(C).32511/2008 -------------------- Dated this the 17th day of November, 2008 JUDGMENT Petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of 74.782 cents of land in Sy.No.157-B of Chinnakanal Village. He is working as a Medical Technologist in the United States. Petitioner acquired title to the property, under Exts.P1, P2, P3 and P4 documents, P4 being the document of title in so far as the petitioner is concerned. Petitioner submits that he purchased the property for putting up a residential building therein and he obtained a No Objection Certificate also from the Chinnakanal Grama Panchayath. It is submitted that the Kerala Municipal Building Rules were made applicable to the Panchayat only with effect from June, 2007. Petitioner has proceeded to construct the building and when the construction was underway, Ext.P5 Stop Memo was issued by the Village Officer. It seems that later, by Ext.P10, petitioner was asked by the first respondent to prove his title over the property. Petitioner submitted a statement producing W.P.(C).32511/2008 2 Exts.P1 to P4 as per Ext.P11. But later Ext.P12 notice was issued by the first respondent, alleging that .3026 hectors of land was found to have been included in Cardamom Hill Reserve area and therefore, petitioner is not entitled to put up a construction therein. Exts.P10 and P12 are under challenge in this writ petition. 2. Learned Government Pleader Mr.Anil Kumar, on instructions, submits that Tahasildar on instructions, has forwarded a report, as regards the nature of the title to the property and also whether the petitioner is entitled to construct a building in the said property, to the District Collector and the Collector will hear the petitioner and pass orders. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the materials, on the basis of which respondent proceeded against the petitioner, may be supplied to the petitioner so that he will be in a position to rebut the same. This, the learned Government Pleader assures to do provided an application is made in that behalf before the District Collector. W.P.(C).32511/2008 3 3. In the result, writ petition is disposed of directing the District Collector to supply the petitioner copy of the notification which indicates that the land in question is in CHR Area. Once such a notification is supplied to the petitioner, it is open to the petitioner to file his objections. Petitioner shall be heard either by himself or through an authorized representative and an order may be passed indicating whether the land is in CHR Area. If the petitioner’s objections are not accepted, coercive action which is proposed to be taken, shall be kept in abeyance for a period of 15 days from the date on which the order is served on the authorized representative. V.GIRI, Judge mrcs