Disposed

G.Rajan v. the District Collector and Others

Kerala HC9 Aug 2011WP(C)/12864/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the second respondent, Revenue Divisional Officer, to consider complaints regarding a hazardous coconut palm, provide a hearing to all parties, and abate the nuisance by removing the tree within six weeks, disposing of the writ petition.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to consider the complaints, afford a hearing, and abate the nuisance within six weeks.

G.Rajan Vs the District Collector and Others — Kerala HC (2011) — LawSathi Research

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT :

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 9TH AUGUST 2011 / 18TH SRAVANA 1933

¶5

WP(C).No. 12864 of 2011(G)

¶6

--------------------------

¶7

PETITIONER:

¶8

¶9

G.RAJAN, AGED 63 YEARS, S/O. GANAPATHI, "SASIVADANA", MYTHRI GARDENS, II LANE, HOUSE NO.19, KAZHACHAPARAMBU, KANNADI.P.O PALAKKAD DIST-678701.

¶10

BY ADV. MR. P.V.GEORGE(PUTHIYIDAM)

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

¶13

THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD - 678001.

¶14

REVENEU DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD 678001

¶15

VILLAGE OFFICER, OFFICE OF VILLAGE OFFICER, KANNADI NO.I VILLAGE, KANNADI.P.O., PALAKKAD-678701.

¶16

N.SURESH KUMAR, AGED ABOUT 48 YEARS, S/O. HARIDASSI, "THEERTHAM", KAZHACHAPARAMBU, MYTHRI GARDENS, II LANE HOUSE NO.20, KANNADI.P.O., PALAKKAD DIST-678701.

¶17

R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER MR. GEORGE VADAKKAL R4 ADV. MR. VINOD KUMAR.C

¶18

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 09/08/2011, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING :

¶19

W.P(C) 12864 OF 2011

¶20

APPENDIX

¶21

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS :

¶22

EXT. P1 : PHOTOGRAPH EXT. P1 (a) : PHOTOGRAPH EXT. P1 (b) : PHOTOGRAPH EXT. P1 (c) : PHOTOGRAPH EXT. P2 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 10.01.2011 SUBMITTED TO 1ST RESPONDENT. EXT. P3 : TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 31.12.2010 SUBMITTED TO 3RD RESPONDENT.

¶23

/TRUE COPY/

¶24

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶25

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.

¶26

¶27

W.P (C) No . 12864 of 2011 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Dated, this the 9^th August , 2011

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking for a direction to be given to the respondents 1 to 3 to take appropriate decision on Exts. P2 and P3 complaints preferred by the petitioner, to cut and remove the coconut palm standing in the compound of the 4^th respondent causing threat to the life of the petitioner and members of his family.

¶30

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the threat very much discernible from the photographs produced as Ext. P1 series. The learned counsel for the 4^th respondent submits that, there is no danger at all; that the coconut palm is situated sufficiently away from the petitioner's property and that necessary check measures / precautions have been taken by putting wire mesh to prevent accidental falling of coconuts or cudjen leaves.

¶31

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well.

¶32

Considering the facts and circumstances, the second

¶33

respondent is directed to consider the matter, after giving an opportunity of hearing to all concerned and abate the nuisance, if any,

¶34

W.P. (C) No. 12864 of 2011

¶35

: 2 :

¶36

by resorting to appropriate steps as provided under the relevant provisions of law. The proceedings as above shall be finalized at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of 'six weeks' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶37

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with copy of the writ petition before the second respondent for further steps.

¶38

The Writ Petition is disposed of.

¶39

Sd/

¶40

P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶41

kmd

¶42

/True copy/

¶43

P.A. to Judge

G.Rajan v. the District Collector and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Rajan v. the District Collector and Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sibi J.Pulloppillil Vs Kunjumohammed

Abdul Basheer Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Minor Sreena Narayanan and Others Vs State of Kerala and Another

Rajanikanth V.S. Vs Director of Medical Education and Anothe

Poozhi Kettida Nirmana Thozhilali Vs the Port Officer

Jayakrishnan J. Vs the University of Calicut and Another