IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HON'BLE THE ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE MR.J.B.KOSHY & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI THURSDAY, THE 26TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 7TH PHALGUNA 1930 WA.No. 468 of 2009() -------------------- AGAINST THE JUDGEMENT/ORDER IN WPC.1569/2009 Dated 24/02/2009 .................... APPELLANT(S): APPELLANT: -------------------------------------------- A.O. JOY, S/O . OUSEPH, AGED 48 YEARS, RESIDING AT AZADUVELY, MUHAMMA P.O., ALAPPUZHA. BY ADV. MR.M.K.CHANDRA MOHANDAS RESPONDENT(S): RESPONDENTS: ---------------------------------------------------- 1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA, 2. THE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANCHAYAT, ALAPPUZHA. 3. ADDITIONAL THAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA. 4. THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SURVEY, DISTRICT COLLECTORAT, ALAPPUZHA. 5. MUHAMMA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 6. THE SECRETARY, MUHAMMA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, MUHAMMA, ALAPPUZHA. R5 & R6 BY ADV. MR. OMPRAKASH THIS WRIT APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 26/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: Kss J.B. Koshy,Ag.C.J. & V.Giri, J. ---------------------------------------- W.A. No. 468 of 2009 ---------------------------------------- Dated this the 26th day of February, 2009 Judgment Koshy, Ag.C.J. The writ petition was filed against the steps of the panchayat in demolishing the building alleged to be situated in puramboku land. The matter was earlier considered by the Ombudsman and it was held by the Ombudsman as follows: “It is true that the portion which is not covered by the extension, which amounts to intrusion has been given building number; but that was based on special circumstances, namely, the petitioner's filing O.S.No.450 of 2001 and later approaching High Court with O.P.No.32266/2002. It was considering the pendency of suit that assigning of a building number on a provisional basis was allowed. this again was subject to the condition that finality to the issue should be given only after disposal of the suit. Actually the suit had been dismissed with cost even on 3.2.2003. Based on the direction of the High Court, the petitioner also executed an agreement in favour of the respondent undertaking to demolish the building, in case the site of the building was found to intrude into puramboke land and that the provisional number allotted could beused only for obtaining ration card and for water and electricity connections. With the dismissal of the suit and the clear finding of the Taluk Surveyor that the building partly intrudes into the puramboke land, foundation of petitioner's W.A.No.468/2009 2 case itself is lost as already mentioned, the number that he got for the building was on conditions and on undertaking through agreement and based on High Court orders which in turn was dependent on the result of the original suit. In the circumstances, I find no scope for modifying my predecessor's order dated 23.2.2008. At the same time, the order directing grant of building number on 6.8.2008 is reviewed suo motto and cancelled. The respondent will proceed with the steps for demolition in accordance with law.” Therefore, the Ombudsman noticed that with the dismissal of the suit and clear finding of Taluk Surveyor, it can be clearly said that the building is situated in puramboke land. Already there is a measurement by Taluk Surveyor. In view of the above finding, no further relief can be granted. However, panchayat should give three weeks' time for demolition of the building which is situated in the puramboke land as per the measurement of the Taluk Surveryor and if petitioner is not demolishing that portion of the building within the three weeks time, panchayat need demolish the building. The writ appeal is disposed of with the above directions. J.B.Koshy Acting Chief Justice V. Giri Judge vaa