IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.GIRI TUESDAY, THE 11TH NOVEMBER 2008 / 20TH KARTHIKA 1930 WP(C).No. 30807 of 2008(P) -------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------- A. HASSANAR, AGED 47, S/O.ABDULLAKUNJU, NAZEA NIVAS, THOTTAPPALLY P.O., ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI.K.I.ABDUL RASHEED RESPONDENT(S): --------------------------- 1. THE STATE OF KERALA, REP. BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY, HIGHER EDUCATION DEPARTMENT, GOVT. SECRETARIAT, TRIVANDRUM. 2. THE HEAD MASTER, NALUCHIRA GOVT. U.P. SCHOOL, THOTTAPPALLY, ALAPPZUHA. BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.P.N.SANTHOSH THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11/11/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: V.GIRI, J. ------------------------- W.P.(C).No.30807 of 2008 ------------------------- Dated this the 11th day of November, 2008. JUDGMENT The dispute raised by the petitioner, on the construction of a compound wall obstructing user of a pathway situated on the northern side of his property wherein he resides, was ultimately resolved by the Lok Adalath, as evidenced by Ext.P4. The operative portion Ext.P4 reads as follows: “For providing such a pathway, the existing compound wall on the south of the school compound (towards west) is to be demolished. The said boundary wall will be reconstructed at the expense of the P.T.A. The plaintiff will contribute an amount of Rs.7,500/- to the P.T.A towards the said expense. It is made clear that the State Govt. need not bear any expense for the reconstruction of the said compound wall. The plaintiff undertakes that he would make the said contribution to the P.T.A within 30 days after the issuance of the revised Govt. order providing pathway as decided supra.” 2. The petitioner's grievance is that in spite of the petitioner having accepted the suggestion and showed readiness to pay the W.P.(C).No.30807 of 2008 :: 2 :: amount, steps have not been taken by the respondents for implementation of the direction given by the Lok Adalath. 3. Heard Learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. 4. Exts.P5 and P6 would show that the petitioner has affirmed acceptance of Ext.P4. The petitioner has requested the respondents to take further action. Inasmuch as that the award passed by the Lok adalath is binding on the parties, there is no reason why the same should not be implemented; nor is there any justification in not implementing the same. In the result, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 1st respondent to see that steps are taken by the subordinate authority for implementation of Ext.P4 at the earliest, at any rate within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. It is made clear that the 2nd respondent shall also be bound by Ext.P4 and shall take steps to see that the direction in W.P.(C).No.30807 of 2008 :: 3 :: Ext.P4 is made effective. It is further made clear that that he shall not take any steps for demolition so as cause any hindrance to the pathway, enjoyed by the petitioner. Sd/- (V.GIRI) JUDGE sk/ //true copy// P.S. To Judge