Disposed

Biju Lal v. the District Collector & Ors.

Kerala HC7 Mar 2008WP(C)/4087/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner challenged a prohibition order on construction that halted a project started with a permit. The High Court directed that encroachment of private property be adjudicated in civil court while directing the Revenue Department to finalize proceedings regarding encroachment of government land within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Directed RDO to finalise proceedings regarding government land encroachment within six weeks. Directed civil court to adjudicate private property encroachment.

Biju Lal Vs the District Collector & Ors. — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2008)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PIUS C.KURIAKOSE

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 7TH MARCH 2008 / 17TH PHALGUNA 1929 WP(C).No. 4087 of 2008(J) -------------------------------------PETITIONER: --------------------BIJU LAL, AGED 37 YEARS, S/O. SURENDRAN, INDIRA BHAVAN, ANAPPARA P.O., TRIVANDRUM.

¶5

BY ADV. SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR

¶6

RESPONDENTS:

¶7

-----------------------1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, TRIVANDRUM.

¶8

2. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VITHURA, TRIVANDRUM.

¶9

3. THE VITHURA GRAMA PANCHAYAT REP. BY SECRETARY, VITHURA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, TRIVANDRUM.

¶10

*ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED:

¶11

R4. AMBIKA, ROADARIKATHU VEEDU, ANAPPARA POST, VITHURA VILLAGE, TRIVANDRUM.

¶12

**(ADDL.R4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DTD. 29/02/2008 IN I.A.NO.3106/08)*

¶13

**ADDL.R5 IS IMPLEADED:

¶14

**R5. THE R.D.O., TRIVANDRUM IS IMPLEADED AS SUO-MOTU AS PER ORDER DTD.7/03/2008 IN WPC.

¶15

R1 & R2 BY SR.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.K.J.MOHAMMED ANZAR R4 BY ADV. SRI. BLAZE K.JOSE

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 07/03/2008, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

Kss

¶18

WPC.NO.4087/2008 J

¶19

APPENDIX

¶20

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶21

EXT.P1:	COPY OF THE PLAN.
EXT.P2:	COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXT.P3:	COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 23/01/2008.

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO JUDGE

Kss

PIUS C. KURIAKOSE,J.

¶26

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - W.P.(C) No.4087 of 2008

¶27

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Dated: 7^th March, 2008

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

Mr.T.A.Unnikrishnan, counsel for the petitioner submits that

¶30

while the petitioner was putting up the building on the strength of a building permit duly issued by the third respondent-Panchayat, he was served with an order by the 2^nd respondent, the Village Officer prohibiting him from continuing with the construction on the basis of oral instructions given by the District Collector. The Government Pleader submits on the basis of the instructions from the District Collector that a complaint was received from the additional 4^th respondent against the constructions of the petitioner. The complaint was that the petitioner while carrying out constructions encroached upon the road puramboke as well as private property belonging to the additional 4^th respondent.

¶31

I have heard the submissions of Mr.T.A.Unnikrishnan, counsel for the petitioner, Mr.Blaze K.Jose, counsel for the additional 4^th respondent and the learned Government Pleader for respondents 1, 2 and 5.

¶32

There is merit in the submissions of Mr.Unnikrishnan that the complaint of the additional 4^th respondent that the private property

¶33

W.P.C.No.4087/08 - 2 -

¶34

belonging to him has been encroached upon is to be adjudicated by a competent civil court. At the same time it is noticed that the complaint which was submitted before the District Collector which was also to the effect that P.W.D. puramboke was encroached upon has been forwarded by the District Collector to the additional 5^th respondent. Additional 5^th respondent is now in seizin of the matter. Under these circumstances, the Writ Petition will stand disposed of issuing the following directions:

¶35

The complaint of the additional 4^th respondent that the private property belonging to him has been encroached upon by the petitioner is to be resolved through a competent civil court. The additional 5^th respondent is directed to issue notice to the petitioner and finalise the proceedings initiated to the extent they are in response to the allegation that the Government land has been encroached upon. The R.D.O. will finalise the proceedings at the earliest and at any rate within six weeks of receiving copy of this judgment since the delay in the matter of carrying out constructions is causing difficulties to the petitioner.

¶36

PIUS C.KURIAKOSE, JUDGE

¶37

srd

¶38

W.P.C.No.4087/08 - 3 -

Biju Lal v. the District Collector & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Biju Lal v. the District Collector & Ors.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt.Omana Ashokan Vs State of Kerala & Others

K.Maniyan Vs Kodamthuruthu Grama Panchayath

V.a.Muhammed Vs the Edavanakkad Grama Panchayat

Cyril Britto Vs Chacko Thomas

Ashoken B. Vs State of Kerala and Others

S.K.Hamza Haji Vs State of Kerala