The High Court of Kerala found that the Railway Over Bridge proposal was based on detailed technical feasibility reports indicating flooding risks with an underpass. The court declined to interfere with the respondent's course of action and dismissed the writ petition.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
FRIDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2013/24TH KARTHIKA, 1935
WP(C).No. 18175 of 2013 (V)
PETITIONERS:
1. C.K.RAJAN, AGED 52 YEARS, S/O.KRISHNAN, CHATTIKANDY HOUSE, PUTHIYAPPA P.O, PUTHIYANMGADI, CALICUT-21.
2. PAVANGAD PUTHIYAPPA UNDERPASS/RAILWAY GATE ACTION COMMITTEE, C.K.BUILDING, PUTHIYAPPA, P.O.PUTHIYANGADI, KOZHIKODE, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN SASIDARAN.
BY ADVS.SRI.P.S.NANDANAN, SRI.SANTHOSH PETER (MAMALAYIL), SRI.P.N.ANOOP, SRI.B.G.RENJITH.
RESPONDENTS:
1. STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE CHIEF SECRETARY, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
2. THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD DIVISION, PALAKKAD, PIN-678 001.
3. DIVISIONAL RAILWAY MANAGER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY, PALAKKAD, PIN-678 001.
4. THE SECRETARY,
5. THE SECRETARY, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
Prv.
W.P.(C).NO.18175/2013-V:
6. THE SECRETARY, MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.
7. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOZHIKODE, PIN-673 004.
8. THE SECRETARY, CORPORATION OF CALICUT, PIN-673 004.
9. THE MANAGING DIRECTOR, ROADS AND BRIDGES DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, THAMMANAM ROAD, PALARIVATTAM, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682 025.
R1,R4,R5 & R7 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. JOSEPH GEORGE, R2 & R3 BY SRI.C.S.DIAS,S.C, R8 BY SRI.K.D.BABU,S.C, R9 BY ADV. SRI.M.VIJAYA KUMAR, S.C.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15-11-2013, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Prv.
W.P.(C).NO.18175/2013-V:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS:
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE.
Prv.
P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON J.
W.P.(C) No. 18175 of 2013
JUDGMENT
The second petitioner is an association of persons known in the name of Pavangad Puthiyappa Underpass/Railway Gate Action Committee, formed for getting sanction to construct a 'Railway Gate' or 'Underpass' to connect Pavangad and Puthiyappa. The first petitioner is a nearby resident, who is interested in the affairs of the second petitioner. The grievance of the petitioners is with regard to the proposal of the Government to construct a 'Railway Over Bridge' in the location, instead of Underpass/Railway Gate, which according to the petitioners will cause much adverse circumstances. Though the petitioners have preferred Exts. P3 and P4 representations before the respondents, projecting their grievance, they are still to be considered. Hence the writ petition.
W.P.(C) No. 18175 of 2013
: 2 :
underpass outway to be constructed at Elathur and Vadakkumpad, pursuant to Ext. P9(a). After a detailed study, the CMO reported that as per the site condition, 'Underpass' was not feasible at the location (Panvangad) and that only 'Railway Over Bridge' could be constructed. It is stated that, there will be every possibility of flooding in the road during monsoon season, if the 'under pass' is constructed, as the site is very near to the Beach. Copy of the said report is produced as Ext. P9(b). On reporting the matter to the Government, after considering the factual position, Administrative sanction was given to construct 'Railway Over Bridge' at Pavangad and an amount of 3.66 crores was earmarked for the same.
W.P.(C) No. 18175 of 2013
: 3 :
Railway level crossings.
Sd/-
P. R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, (JUDGE)
kmd
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the Government's proposal to construct a Railway Over Bridge instead of an Underpass.
Whether a Municipal Council has the power to construct elevator type lifts.
What is the proper remedy when a decision is taken based on technical feasibility rather than administrative policy.
C.K.RAJAN
PAVANGAD PUTHIYAPPA UNDERPASS/RAILWAY GATE ACTION COMMITTEE
STATE OF KERALA
THE SENIOR DIVISIONAL ENGINEER, SOUTHERN RAILWAY
MINISTRY OF RAILWAYS
CORPORATION OF CALICUT
P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
