Disposed

Ravikumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC9 Feb 2015WP(C)/2610/2015

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging encroachment on road margins by a society. The Court directed the District Collector to consider the pending complaint, afford an opportunity of hearing to relevant authorities and the society, and finalize proceedings within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to District Collector to consider the complaint after hearing все interested parties and finalize proceedings within two months.

Ravikumar Vs State of Kerala — Public Procurement and Tenders | Kerala HC (2015)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.R.RAMACHANDRA MENON

¶4

MONDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/20TH MAGHA, 1936

¶5

WP(C).No. 2610 of 2015 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

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

¶8

RAVIKUMAR, AGED 46 YEARS, S/O.MADHAVAN PILLAI, MADHAVA VILASAM EDAVATTOMCHERRY CHIRACKARA P.O., CHIRACKARA VILLAGE, KOLLAM DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.V.VENUGOPALAN NAIR

¶10

RESPONDENTS :

¶11

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

¶12

1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPT. OF REVENUE, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

¶13

2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KOLLAM - 691 001.

¶14

3. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MEENADU VILLAGE,CHATHANNOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT - 691 001.

¶15

4. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD (ROADS AND BRIDGES) OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD (ROADS AND BRIDGES), DIVISIONAL OFFICE, BEACH ROAD, KOLLAM - 691 001.

¶16

5. THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER PWD (ROADS AND BRIDGES) SECTION OFFICE, CHATHANNOOR P.O., KOLLAM - 691 001.

¶17

6. THE SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, CHATHANNOOR POLICE STATION, KOLLAM DISTRICT-691 001.

¶18

7. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF POLICE, CHATHANNOOR, KOLLAM DISTRICT 691 001.

¶19

8. THE CITY POLICE CHIEF, KOLLAM CITY - 691 001.

¶20

WP(C).No. 2610 of 2015 (A)

¶21

9. THE REGISTRAR OF CHARITABLE SOCIETIES, OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT REGISTRAR, NEAR CIVILSTATION, KOLLAM - 691 001.

¶22

10. THE PALAMOODU

¶23

ARTS AND SPORTS CLUB CUM READING ROOM, PALAMOODU, CHATHANNOOR P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY - 691 001.

¶24

R1 TO R9 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. K.C. VINCENT R10 BY ADV. SRI.AJAYA KUMAR. G.

¶25

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 09-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶26

¶27

WP(C).No. 2610 of 2015 (A)

¶28

APPENDIX

¶29

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶30

EXT.P-1: TRUE COPY OF LAND TAX RECEIPT IN RESPECT OF PETITIONERS PROPERTY.

¶31

EXT.P-2: TRUE COPY THE RECEIPT ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 8TH RESPONDENT DTD 12.1.15.

¶32

EXT.P-3: TRUE COPY THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR DTD 12.1.15.

¶33

EXT.P-4: A TRUE COPY OF THE SAID REPRESENTATION SO SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT PWD EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KOLLAM DTD 12.1.15

¶34

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, J.

¶39

W.P.(C) No.2610 of 2015

¶40

Dated this the 9^th day of February, 2015

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

The petitioner has approached this Court with the following

¶43

prayers:

¶44

“(i) Declare that the petitioner has a right to use the road margin to all the portions of his property located behind the same for his ingress and egress to the property including vehicular conveyance and also that nobody has any manner of right to make any construction or cause any blockade in any road margin so as to operate as a hurdle against such ingress and egress to and from the property located just behind it and causing loss of road frontage to the said property.

¶45

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus order or direction directing respondents 3,4,6&8 to demolish the structure constructed in the road margin in front of petitioner's property covered by Ext.P1.

¶46

(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus, direction or order directing the 9^th respondent to cancel the registration of the 10^th respondent since the 10^th respondent is involved in illegal activities.

¶47

(iv) Grant any other appropriate relief considering the nature and circumstances of the case.

¶48

(v) Grant the cost of this writ petition.”

¶49

Despite the completion of service of notice, the 10^th

¶50

respondent has not chosen to appear before this Court.

¶51

The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that, in spite of pointing out the encroachment made by the 10^th

¶52

W.P.(C) No.2610 of 2015

¶53

¶54

respondent, no proper action has been taken by the 2^nd respondent or the 4^th respondent, before whom Exts.P3 and P4 are pending.

¶55

Heard the learned Government Pleader as well, who submits on instructions from the authorities of the PWD that, the construction effected by the 10^th respondent is beyond the width of the PWD road, adding that whether there is any actual encroachment into the road margin or the property belonging to the Government, it is a matter to be verified further.

¶56

In the above circumstances, the 2^nd respondent is directed to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P3 in accordance with law, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the authorities of the PWD and also the 10^th respondent. The proceedings as above shall be finalised at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of 'two months' from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶57

Petitioner shall produce a copy of this judgment, along with a copy of the writ petition, before the 2^nd respondent, for further

¶58

W.P.(C) No.2610 of 2015

¶59

¶60

steps.

¶61

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶62

P.R. RAMACHANDRA MENON, JUDGE

¶63

Ravikumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ravikumar v. State of Kerala

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

K.T.Vincent Vs Sheikh Pareeth, District Collector, Ernakulam

K.v.Krishnakumar Vs State of Kerala

Lincy Mathew Vs the Kerala Gramin Bank

T.a.Kunhimon Vs the Tahsildar, Chavakkad Taluk

Aboobacker Siddik Vs the Land Tribunal

Rafeek P.H. Vs Regional Transport Officer