Petitioner alleged encroachment on a road and non-compliance with a directive to surveyors. The Court directed the Talluk Surveyor to measure the road and evict trespassers.
Directed the 4th respondent to comply with directions in Ext. P7 to measure the road and evict trespassers, with aid of the Police if necessary.
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 A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI
WEDNESDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2015/15TH MAGHA, 1936
WP(C).No. 4518 of 2012 (L)
PETITIONER :
M.M. LUCA,
AGED 75 YEARS, S/O.MATHAI, MUNDUVAYALIL HOUSE POOKOTHUMANA P.O., RAMACHAM PADAM, CHUNGATHARA NILAMBUR.
BY ADVS.SRI.A.T.ANILKUMAR SMT.V.SHYLAJA
RESPONDENT(S) :
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR MALAPPURAM, PIN – 676 505.
2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER PERINTHALMANNA, MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 322.
3. THE THAHASILDAR NILAMBUR TALUK, NILAMBUR,
MALAPPURAM, PIN – 679 330
4. TALUK SURVEYOR NILAMBOOR TALUK, NILAMBUR,
5. VILLAGE OFFICER CHUNGATHARA VILLAGE, NILAMBUR,
PIN – 679 350.
6. CHUNGATHARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH REP. BY SECRETARY, CHUNGATHARA,
NILAMBUR TALUK, PIN – 679 330
R1 TO R5 BY GOVT. PLEADER SMT. SUNITHA VINOD
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04-02-2015, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
WP(C).No. 4518 of 2012 (L)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
EXHIBIT P1 & P1(a): THE TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 21/7/2010 WITH RECEIPT. EXHIBIT P2 & P2(a): THE TRUE COPY OF THE RESURVEY SKETCH SHOWING THE ACTUAL WIDTH AND LENGTH OF THE “KUNNATHKUTTIMUNDA-RAMACHANPADAM” ROAD. EXHIBIT P3: THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM AS A REPLY TO THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE COMPLAINT REDRESSAL CELL. EXHIBIT P4: THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 31/1/2011. EXHIBIT P5: THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6: THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18/5/2010. EXHIBIT P7: THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 11/3/2011. EXHIBIT P8: THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN CIVIL APPEAL NO.1132/2011 (JAGPAL SINGH AND OTHERS VS. STATE OF PUNJAB & OTHERS).
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
Mn
A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, J.
-------------------------------------------------W.P.(C) No. 4518 of 2012
Dated this the 4th day of February, 2015
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner approached this Court alleging that though the 1st respondent, by Ext.P7, had directed the 3rd respondent to evict the unauthorized trespassers into the road by effecting proper measurement, no action has been taken by the authorities regarding the same.
..2..
W.P.(C) No. 4518 of 2012
difficult. They also allege that the survey stones installed on the side of the road demarcating the boundaries were also removed by the encroachers. The petitioner along with other neighbours submitted Exts.P1 and P1(a) complaints before the 6th respondent. According to the petitioner, the 1st respondent directed the 4th respondent to conduct measurement of the road and to evict the unauthorized trespassers from the road. As per Ext.P7, the 1st respondent directed the 3rd respondent also to take steps to evict the unauthorized trespassers. The petitioner alleges that Ext.P7 direction did not evoke any positive response. It is with this background, the petitioner has come up before this Court.
As the 4th respondent is duty bound to obey the
W.P.(C) No. 4518 of 2012
directions in Ext.P7, this Court is of the view that this writ petition can be disposed of directing the 4th respondent to comply with the directions in Ext.P7.
Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of directing the 4th respondent to comply with the directions in Ext.P7, if necessary, with the aid of the Police.
Sd/- A.V. RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUDGE
bka/-
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner is entitled to a writ directing the Taluk Surveyor to comply with directions to evict unauthorized trespassers and measure the road.
Whether the Court can direct the 4th respondent to act in aid of the police.
Whether the lack of response by authorities to a previous direction warrants specific relief.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Jagpal Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab & OthersReferred¶2
Civil Appeal No.1132/2011 (Jagpal Singh and Others vs. State of Punjab & Others)
M.M. Luca
The District Collector Malappuram
The Revenue Divisional Officer Perinthalmanna
The Tahasildar Nilambur Taluk
Taluk Surveyor Nilamboor Taluk
Village Officer Chungathara Village
A.V. Ramakrishna Pillai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
A.V. Ramakrishna Pillai
Parties & counsel
