Disposed

Vinod Kumar R. v. the Executive Engineer, PWD

Kerala HC20 Jan 2016WP(C)/612/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This single-line order accepted the respondent Forest Officer's written instruction that the petitioner could proceed with cable laying on PWD land, provided no forest area was used without Forest Department permission.

What did the court decide?

Writ petition disposed; petitioner allowed to proceed on PWD land but prohibited from using forest area without Forest Department permission.

Vinod Kumar R. Vs the Executive Engineer, PWD — Contract and Commercial Disputes | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF JANUARY 2016/30TH POUSHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 612 of 2016 (B)

¶6

PETITIONER(S) :

¶7

VINODKUMAR R., AGED 21 YEARS, S/O.RAJAN, NATTAKALLOOR, 7/346 KOTTATHARA P.O., AGALI, ATTAPPADY (MANAGING PARTNER, SREE GANAPATHI DIGITAL CABLE TV & BROAD BAND SERVICES, CHANTHAKKADA, KOTTAMTHARA, AGALI-678 581.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.SHAJI JOSEPH

¶9

RESPONDENT(S) :

¶10

1. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS DIVISION), PALAKKAD-678 001.

¶11

2. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER, MANNARKKAD, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-678 582.

¶12

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, PALAKKAD-678 001.

¶13

BY SPL.GOVT.PLEADER SRI.M.P.MADHAVANKUTTY (FOREST)

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-01-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

Msd.

¶16

WP(C).No. 612 of 2016 (B)

¶17

APPENDIX

¶18

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS :

¶19

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTRATION CERTIFICATE NO. 669 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

¶20

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 30-01-2014 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

¶21

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND ASIANET SATELLITE COMMUNICATIONS.

¶22

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE EXTRACT OF THE BASIC TAX REGISTER OF KALLAMALA VILLAGE, MANNARKAD TALUK IN RESPECT OF SURVEY NOS. 689 TO 707.

¶23

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE PRELIMINARY SURVEY SKETCH ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, PALAKAYAM.

¶24

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS :

NIL

//TRUE COPY//

P.A.TO JUDGE.

Msd.

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶30

W.P.(C).No. 612 of 2016

¶31

----------------------------------------------------Dated this the 20^th day of January, 2016

¶32

JUDGMENT

¶33

The petitioner seeks for the following reliefs:

¶34

(i) To issue a writ of mandamus or other appropriate writ or order directing the 2^nd respondent not to obstruct the work of the petitioner covered by Ext.P2 order of the 1^st respondent.

¶35

(ii) To grant such other reliefs, as this Hon'ble Court shall deem just and proper in the interest of justice, including costs.

¶36

The learned Government Pleader placed before me

¶37

the written instruction. It is stated in the instruction that

¶38

the 2^nd respondent has no objections in this regard, provided

¶39

the petitioner is actually performing the laying of underground pipes through the area owned and possessed

¶40

by the PWD authorities.

¶41

W.P.(C).No. 612 of 2016

¶42

-2-

¶43

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of. It

¶44

is made clear that no part of the forest area should be used

¶45

for laying cable, without the permission of the 2nd

¶46

respondent.

¶47

Sd/-

¶48

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

¶49

bpr

Vinod Kumar R. v. the Executive Engineer, PWD

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vinod Kumar R. v. the Executive Engineer, PWD

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

Malabar Fire Works Owners Welfare Assoc Vs the District Magistrate/Dist.Collector

Pushpalatha.C Vs the Tahsildar

Rijeesh Vs Sub Inspector of Police

Muhammed Faizal Vs the District Geologist

Mini Marson Vs Geologist

Mercy Vs the Department of Mining and Geology