IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANTONY DOMINIC THURSDAY, THE 25TH FEBRUARY 2010 / 6TH PHALGUNA 1931 WP(C).No. 4656 of 2010(F) ------------------------- PETITIONER(S): --------------- GEORGE C.C. AGED 58 YEARS, S/O.CHACKOLA, CHAKKALAMATTATH HOUSE, ANNALLUR P.O., ASHTA MICHIRA, THRISSUR DIST. BY ADV. SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR RESPONDENT(S): --------------- 1. MALA GRAMAPANCHAYAT, REP.BY ITS SECRETARY, PANCHAYAT OFFICE, MALA, THRISSUR DIST. 2. SUJATHA SADANANDAN, MELOOTTIL HOUSE, ANNALLUR, THRISSUR DIST. (MEMBER, MALA GRAMA PANCHAYAT COMMITTEE). 3. SADANANDAN, MELOOTTIL HOUSE, ANNALLUR, THRISSUR DIST. ADV. SRI.WILSON URMESE FOR R2 & 3 MS.A.V.DEVY, SC FOR R1. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25/02/2010, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WPC NO.4656/2010 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS P1 : COPY OF THE LICENSE ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT TO THE PETITIONER DATED 13/05/2009. P2 : COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE DESTRUCTION OF THE BRIDGE. P2(a) : COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE DESTRUCTION OF THE BRIDGE. P3 : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 06/02/2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO R1. P3(a) : COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 06/02/2010 FILED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, MALA. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. jg ANTONY DOMINIC, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C.) No.4656 of 2010 (F) --------------------------------- Dated, this the 25th day of February, 2010 J U D G M E N T The allegation in the writ petition is that a bridge, constructed by the Panchayat across a thodu, which is used by the petitioner for access his property, was destroyed by respondents 2 & 3. It is stated that as a result of that, the petitioner is prevented from entering his metal crusher unit. The Panchayat also submits that the bridge in question was destroyed by somebody and that they have made a complaint to the Police. While the learned counsel for respondent 2 & 3 submits that the matter has been settled between the parties, the submission is disputed by the learned counsel for the petitioner. 2. From the submissions made, therefore, it is evident that the bridge, constructed by the Panchayat across the thodu, which is used as the access for the petitioner to enter his metal crusher unit, was destroyed by some miscreants. If that be so, necessarily, the Police, to whom the complaint has been made, has to take action in WP(C) No.4656/2010 -2- the matter. The main grievance of the petitioner is that as a result of the aforesaid act, he is not in a position to enter into the metal crusher unit. While this allegation is disputed by the learned counsel appearing for respondents 2 & 3 and the panchayat, fact remains that there was a bridge, which has now been destroyed. If that be so, necessarily, it is for the Panchayat to repair the same. This the Panchayat shall do on an expeditious basis, and if it is not done within six weeks from today, the Panchayat will permit the petitioner to repair the bridge in question. It will be open to the Panchayat to recover the cost for repairing the bridge from whoever is responsible for damaging the bridge. This writ petition is disposed of as above. (ANTONY DOMINIC, JUDGE) jg