IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE S.SIRI JAGAN FRIDAY, THE 17TH JULY 2009 / 26TH ASHADHA 1931 WP(C).No. 17794 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- C.K.RADHAKRISHNA PANICKER CHAKKALA VADAKKATHIL ,PONAKAM MURI, THEKKEKKARA VILLAGE, MAVELIKKARA. BY ADV. SRI.P.B.SAHASRANAMAN SRI.K.JAGADEESH SRI.T.S.HARIKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPUZHA. 2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER CHENGANNUR. 3. THE TAHASILDAR, TALUK OFFICE MAVELIKARA. 4. MULLIKULANGARA DEVI KSHETHRA BHRANA SAMITHI, MAVELIKKARA REPRESENTED BY ITS PRESIDENT SRI.K.RAMAKRISHNA UNNITHAN, ANIL BHAVANAM, PALLARIMANGALAM,THEKKEKARA. 5. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE CHENGANNUR. ADV. SRI.P.JACOB VARGHESE, SENIOR ADVOCATE FOR R4 SRI.G.GOPAKUMAR (CHERTHALA) FOR R4 GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT.N.SUDHADEVI, FOR R1 TO 3 & 5 SRI.RASHEED C.NOORANAD FOR R4 THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.7.09 THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C). No. 17794/08. APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: P1. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P.(C). No. 21906/2004 OF THIS COURT. P2. COPY OF THE ORDER IN COMPLAINT NO.1389/2006, DTD.8.1.07. P3. COPY OF THE STATEMENT FILED BY THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, MAVELIKKARA DATED 3.4.2007 BEFORE LOK AYUKTA. P4. COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE LOKAYUKTA IN I.A.NO.297/07 IN COMPLAINT NO.1389/2006, DATED 27.12.07. P5. COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN O.S.NO.176/2005 DATED 10.10.08. P6. COPY OF THE SURVEY SKETCH, DATED 5.8.06. RESPONDENT(S)'EXHIBITS R4A. COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER. “B. COPY OF THE NOTICE FOR CONCILIATION DTD.27.10.05. “C. COPY OF THE ORDER OF RDO DTD.4.1.07. “D. COPY OF THE NOTICE FOR CONCILIATION DTD.12.3.08. Sdk+ ///True copy/// P.S. to Judge S. Siri Jagan, J. =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= W. P (C) No. 17794 of 2008 =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= Dated this, the 17th July, 2009. J U D G M E N T The petitioner is a person who owns certain property near to the property in possession of the 4th respondent, which is a committee which manages a temple. According to the petitioner, the 4th respondent has made some constructions encroaching into the road poramboke, which requires to be demolished by resort to proceedings under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act. The matter had earlier gained the attention of this Court and Ext. P1 judgment was passed wherein noting that going by the photographs produced by the petitioner it would appear that the structure constructed by the 4th respondent has been constructed on the road poramboke, this Court directed respondents 1 to 3 to remove the said structure within two months from date of production of copy of the judgment. However, it was further made clear therein that the same is without prejudice to the contentions of the 4th respondent and their right to challenge the order of the Revenue Divisional Officer, wherein encroachment was found, if any valid challenge is made to the same. According to the petitioner, proceedings have been initiated further and both the Revenue Divisional Officer and the District Collector have come to the conclusion that the construction made by the 4th respondent is encroaching into the road poramboke. This is disputed by the counsel for the 4th respondent. In view of the facts and circumstances of the case, I put it to the parties as to whether they have any objection in this Court directing respondents 1 to 3 to measure the properties to ascertain whether there is encroachment into the road poramboke by the 4th respondent and whether on such measurement, if encroachment is found, the 4th respondent is willing to demolish the structure and give vacant possession of the encroached portion of the road poramboke. After obtaining instructions from the 4th respondent, W.P.C. No. 17794/08 -: 2 :- counsel for the 4th respondent informs me that the 4th respondent has adopted a resolution agreeing to demolish the structure and give vacant possession if a measurement with notice to them is taken and it is found that they have encroached into the road poramboke. This suggestion is acceptable to the petitioner also. In the above circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of with the following directions. Respondents 1 to 3 shall make arrangements to measure the property with notice to the petitioner as well as the 4th respondent. If on such measurement, it is found that the 4th respondent has encroached into the road poramboke, as agreed by the 4th respondent, they shall demolish the structure constructed by them in the road poramboke and give vacant possession of the same to respondents 1 to 3 without any objection whatsoever. If any other person is likely to be affected by the measurement, he/she shall also be given notice. The above exercise shall be taken up and completed as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Sd/- S. Siri Jagan, Judge. Tds/