IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC WEDNESDAY, THE 28TH SEPTEMBER 2011 / 6TH ASWINA 1933 WP(C).No. 15653 of 2011(F) -------------------------- PETITIONER : ------------ M.DAVOOD, S/O.M.ABDULLA HAJI, AGED 33 YEARS, RESIDING AT VALAPPIL HOUSE, ATHINHAL, MANIKOTH POST, KANHANGAD, KASARAGOD DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.T.MADHU RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. THE UNION OF INDIA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF ROAD TRANSPORT AND HIGHWAYS, TRANSPORT BHAVAN, PARLIAMENT STREET, NEW DELHI-110001. 2. THE STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001. 3. THE CHIEF ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAYS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. 4. THE SUPERINTENDING ENGINEER, P.W.D.NATIONAL HIGHWAYS, NORTH CIRCLE, KOZHIKODE-673307. 5. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, NATIONAL HIGHWAY DIVISION, KANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT-670001. 6. THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF POLICE, VIGILANCE AND ANTI CORRUPTION BUREAU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001. ...2/- WP(C).No. 15653 of 2011(F) -2- *ADDL. R7 IMPLEADED *7. MOIDEENKUTTY HAJI, S/O. KUNHAPPU, PATTUVATHIL HOUSE, THEKKIL P.O., KASARGOD DISTRICT. *ADDL.R7 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DT. 28/09/2011 IN I.A. NO. 10024/11. R1 BY ADV. SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR, ASG OF INDIA R2, R4 & R6 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. P.N. SANTHOSH R3 & R5 BY ADV. SRI. THOMAS ANTONY, SC R7 BY ADV. SRI.SHIRAZ ABDULLA THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28/09/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Mn ...3/- WP(C).No. 15653 of 2011(F) APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXT.P1 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 19-3-2011 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS 1 TO 5. EXT.P2 : COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING THE RECEIPTS OF EXT.P1 BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P3 : COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING THE RECEIPTS OF EXT.P1 BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXT.P4 : COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING THE RECEIPTS OF EXT.P1 BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P5 : COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING THE RECEIPTS OF EXT.P1 BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6 : COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER AND OTHERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT.P7 : COPY OF THE POSTAL ACKNOWLEDGEMENT CARD EVIDENCING THE RECEIPTS OF EXT.P6 BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT. RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// P.S. TO JUDGE Mn ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ================ W.P.(C) NO. 15653 OF 2011 ===================== Dated this the 28th day of September, 2011 J U D G M E N T The writ petitioner is a businessman. According to him, he is conducting his business near the railway gate at KM 90/695 at Padanakkadu in Kasargod District. Respondents are now constructing an over bridge on the approach road at the aforesaid place. The allegation of the petitioner is that on account of the construction of the approach roads on both sides of the over bridge, the access to the highway will be lost. 2. In the statement filed on behalf of the 5th respondent, in paragraph 5 and 9, it is stated thus:- “5. As per originally approved drawing itself one of the Municipal roads on Kasaragod side will loose direct access to existing NH. To solve these difficulties service roads are proposed during execution. And the same will be provided. 9. It is true that site engineer and the contractor informed the local public that, approach roads will be constructed by providing necessary vertical retaining walls so as to provide necessary access to for Municipal roads to NH. Work is being carried out accordingly. Portion of approach roads with Reinforced earth (RE) walls for a length of 113m towards Kasaragod is in progress. Balance portion of approach road with vertical retaining walls is to be commenced on completion of approach roads with RE walls. Access to NH from any Municipal road is not denied. Adequate care has been WPC No. 15653/11 :2 : also taken at site to see that these accesses are not denied at any stage during execution of works.” 3. From the aforesaid averments in the statement itself, it is obvious that the grievance which led the petitioner to file this writ petition has been duly taken care of. Therefore, recording the aforesaid undertaking contained in the statement filed on behalf of the 5th respondent, this writ petition is closed. ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE Rp