IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE M.C.HARI RANI WEDNESDAY, THE 30TH JULY 2008 / 8TH SRAVANA 1930 WP(C).No. 18211 of 2008(R) -------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------ RAKESH G.MNAIR, S/O.GOPALAKRISHNAN NAIR, AGED 24 YEARS, PAZHAVEEDU - PERUKAVU PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM BY ADV. SMT.MAJIDA.S SRI.K.RAJESH KANNAN SRI.AJIKHAN.M RESPONDENTS: ------------- 1. STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY HOME SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 2. SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE (RURAL), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 3. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE NEYYATTINKARA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 4. C.I. OF POLICE MALAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 5. S.I. OF POLICE, MALAYINKEEZHU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 6. KRISHNAN NAIR, RESIDING AT PAZHAVEEDU, PERUKAVU PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. W.P.(C) NO.18211/2008 7. RADHAKRISHNAN, PAZHAVEEDU, RESIDING AT PERUKAVU PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 8. RAHUL, RESIDING AT PAZHAVEEDU, PERUKAVU PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 9. MANIKANTAN NAIR, RESIDING AT CHITHIRA, PAZHAVEEDU, PERUKAVU PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 10. MOHANAN NAIR, RESIDING AT GAYATHRI VIHAR, KALLINGAL VILAKOM, PERUKAVU PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 11. AJAYDAS S.V., S.V.NIVAS, ERAVILA, PERUKAVU.P.O. THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. 12. GOPAKUMAR, RESIDING AT ARAPURAVILA, PERUKAVU PO., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. BY ADV. SRI.R.V.SREEJITH FOR R6-12 GOVERNMENT PLEADER, SRI.BENJAMIN PAUL. THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 30/07/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.18211/2008 APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXTS: EXT.P1: COPY OF SALE DEED NO.4883/2006 OF MALAYINKEEZHU S.R.P. DT.4.12.2006. EXT.P2: COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DT.18.2.2008. EXT.P3: COPY OF BUILDING PERMIT NO.BP 410/07-08 DT.25.2.2008 ISSUED FROM VILAVOORKAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT. EXT.P4: COPY OF INJUNCTION ORDER IN I.A.NO.2552/2008 IN O.S.NO.458/2008 OF THE VACATION COURT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXT.P5: COPY OF COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXT.P6: COPY OF RECEIPT IN TOKEN OF RECEIPT OF EXT.P5 NO.F3/DP/390/08. EXT.P7: COPY OF COMPLAINT FILED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXT.P8 SERIES: COPY OF TAX RECEIPT AND CONSENT LETTER AND THE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR MUTATION. EXT.P9 SERIES: COPY OF PHOTOGRAPHS. EXT.PI0: COPY OF F.I.R. EXT.P11: COPY OF ORDER OF OMBUDSMAN DT.18.6.2008. EXT.P12: COPY OF ORDER OF OMBUDSMAN DT.9.7.2008. EXT.P13: COPY OF RE-SURVEY PLAN AND SKETCH. RESPONDENT'S EXTS: EXT.R8(a): COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE RESIDENTS AT THE LOCALITY BEFORE THE HON'BLE R.D.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. W.P.(C) No.18211/2008 EXT.R8(b): COPY OF THE STOP MEMO ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VILAVOORKAL DIRECTING THE PETITIONER TO STOP THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE BUILDING. EXT.R8(c): COPY OF THE NEWS ITEM REPORTED IN 'CHANDRIKA' DAILY DT.12.5.2008. EXT.R8(d): COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYAT SECRETARY DT.20.6.2008. //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE. K. BALAKRISHNAN NAIR & M.C.HARI RANI, JJ. ------------------------------------- W.P.(C) No.18211 OF 2008 ------------------------------------- Dated this the 30th day of July, 2008 J U D G M E N T ~~~~~~~~~~~ Balakrishnan Nair, J. The petitioner claims possession and ownership of ten cents of land in Vilavoorkal Grama Panchayat. Reliance is placed on Ext.P1 sale deed and Ext.P2 tax receipt in support of that submission. He has obtained Ext.P3 building permit from the Vilavoorkal Grama Panchayat. When he started construction, the respondents 6 to 12 started causing obstruction. Then he moved the civil court and obtained Ext.P4 interim injunction order against some of them. Even thereafter, they continued the obstruction. So, the petitioner filed Ext.P5 representation before the Sub Inspector of Police, Malayinkeezhu and Ext.P7 representation before the District Superintendent of Police. Alleging that the police did not take any effective action to protect him, this writ petition is filed. W.P.(C) No.18211/2008 2 2. The respondents 6 to 12 have filed a counter affidavit stating that the petitioner has got right over only eight cents of property, but he is keeping in his possession 10 cents which includes Thodupuramboke also. The present construction is attempted, trespassing into the said puramboke land which he has reduced to his possession. So, petitions were filed by the local people including the party respondents before the Revenue Divisional Officer, a copy of which is produced as Ext.R8(a). Later, the Village Officer has issued Ext.R8(b) stop memo on 8.5.2008 prohibiting construction. The petitioner is threatening the local people by employing muscle men. A news items has been published about the same, a copy of which is produced as Ext.R8(c). The Panchayat has also issued Ext.R8(d) stop memo calling upon the petitioner to stop the construction. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner is not entitled to get any protection. For not placing the facts concerning Ext.R8(b), before this Court, the the writ petition is liable to be dismissed without hearing on merits, it is submitted. W.P.(C) No.18211/2008 3 3. The petitioner has filed a reply affidavit denying the allegations of the party respondents. He has produced Ext.P8 which would show that his predecessor in interest has got patta for 1.5 cents of land and the said person has agreed to mutate that property in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner has produced Ext.P9 series of photographs to show the alleged atrocities from the part of the party respondents. Ext.P10 F.I.R. would show that a crime has been registered against some of the party respondents for the offences punishable under Sections 143, 147, 149, 294(b) & 506(1) of Indian Penal Code. Ext.P11 would show that a complaint filed by the 7th respondent, against the construction undertaken by the petitioner, has been closed by the Ombudsman. Another complaint filed by one Mr.Praveen has been dealt with by the Ombudsman as per Ext.P12 order. As per that order, the Ombudsman has permitted the petitioner to continue with the construction, it is submitted. 4. We heard the learned Government Pleader for the respondents also. The right of the petitioner to continue the construction and the alleged obstruction caused to the same by W.P.(C) No.18211/2008 4 the party respondents etc. are matters which are pending before the civil court. The police has no power or authority to interfere in that matter in favour of one side or the other. But the petitioner points out that he is being physically threatened with harm by the party respondents. On other hand, the party respondents would submit that petitioner's muscle men are after them and therefore they require police protection. 5. The petitioner is not entitled to get protection for his life when he is in the work site and undertaking the construction. Unless Ext.R8(b) is avoided in appropriate proceedings the petitioner cannot seek protection from this Court to continue with the construction. The orders of the Ombudsman will have efficacy against the proceedings of the Panchayat and not against the orders of the Village Officer. If the local people are entering the work site and obstructing, he can pursue his remedies before the Civil Court. But, if he goes around attending to his normal other businesses and if anybody is threatening him, he may inform the police. In that event, the police shall look into the same and, if the allegation is found W.P.(C) No.18211/2008 5 correct, take appropriate action. If the petitioner or his muscle men are threatening the party respondents herein, they may also inform the police. In that event, the police shall take appropriate action on those motions also. The writ petition is disposed of as above. (K.BALAKRISHNAN NAIR, JUDGE) (M.C.HARI RANI, JUDGE) ps