Disposed

K.v.Kuriakose v. District Collector, Ernakulam

Kerala HC11 Jul 2018WP(C)/23048/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court directed revenue and survey officials to complete ongoing survey proceedings regarding P.V.I.P land within four months. It further held that official respondents could request police aid from the Inspector of Police if deemed necessary for the survey.

What did the court decide?

Ordering respondents 3 and 4 to complete the survey within four months; Respondent 10 to consider requests for police aid by other respondents.

K.v.Kuriakose Vs District Collector, Ernakulam — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF JULY 2018 / 20TH ASHADHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 23048 of 2018

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

K.V.KURIAKOSE, S/O.VARGHESE, AGED 71 YEARS, RESIDING AT KIZHAKKEKUNNEL HOUSE, MORAKKALA KARA, KUNNATHUNADU VILLAGE, KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 565.

¶8

BY ADV.SRI.C.DILIP

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

¶11

CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM,

¶12

PIN - 682 030.

¶13

2. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, MINI CIVIL STATION, MUDAVOOR P.O.,

¶14

MUVATTUPUZHA, PIN - 686 662.

¶15

3. TAHSILDAR,

¶16

KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, PERUMBAVOOR.P.O.,

¶17

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 542.

¶18

4. TALUK SURVEYOR,

¶19

KUNNATHUNADU TALUK, PERUMBAVOOR,

¶20

ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 542.

¶21

5. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

¶22

PERIYAR VALLEY IRRIGATION PROJECT (P.V.I.P.) SUB DIVISION NO.7, KOLENCHERRY, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 682 311.

¶23

6. THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PERIYAR VALLEY IRRIGATION PROJECT (P.V.I.P.)

¶24

DIVISION - 2, THOTTAKKATTUKARA P.O.,

¶25

ALUVA, PIN - 683 108.

¶26

7. PAREEKUNJU,

¶27

S/O.MUSTHAFA, THANNISSERRY HOUSE, ERUVELI KARA,

¶28

KUMARAPURAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 565.

¶29

WP(C).No. 23048 of 2018

¶30

8. KHADAR, S/O.MUSTHAFA, THANNISSERRY HOUSE, ERUVELI KARA, KUMARAPURAM P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 565. 9. VARGHESE, PANKODAN HOUSE, KUMARAPURAM P.O., MORAKKALA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 565. 10. THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE, KUNNATHUNADU POLICE STATION, PATTIMATTOM, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN - 683 562. R1 TO R6 & R10 - BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.K.P.MADHU

¶31

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11-07-2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶32

WP(C).No. 23048 of 2018 (E)

¶33

¶34

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶35

EXHIBIT P1:	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF SETTLEMENT DEED NO.3909/2008 DATED 14/05/2008 OF SRO PUTHENCRUZ.
EXHIBIT P2:	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED NIL SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE FIRST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3:	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 05/09/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECOND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4:	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF SURVEY NOTICE DATED 23/01/2016 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5:	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF APPLICATION DATED 06/02/2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6:	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 13/10/2016 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER.

¶36

TRUE COPY

¶37

P.A. TO JUDGE

¶38

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶39

W.P.(C)No.23048 of 2018

¶40

Dated this the 11^th day of July, 2018

¶41

JUDGMENT

¶42

The case of the petitioner is that the only access to his residential property is through the Western bank of the canal that belongs to the Periyar Valley Irrigation Project (PVIP) and that due to encroachment over the way by contesting respondents 7 to 9, its width has been reduced considerably thus causing difficulty to the petitioner for the ingress and egress to his property. Ext.P1 is the title deed in respect of the property of the petitioner. The case of the petitioner is that based on the representation of the petitioner as per Exts.P2 and P3 as well as the request made by the official respondents 5 and 6 (Assistant Executive Engineer and Executive Engineer of the PVIP under the Irrigation Department) steps for survey was set in motion and as evident from Ext.P4 form No.6 notice dated 23.1.2016 was issued by the 4^th respondent Taluk Surveyor, Kunnathunadu Taluk. It is further stated that the steps for survey initiated as per Ext.P4 notice remained incomplete due to the obstructions said to have been caused by contesting respondent Nos.7 to 9. Thereafter the petitioner could learn from Ext.P6 letter dated 13.10.2016 issued by the official respondents 5

¶43

W.P.(C)No.23048 of 2018

¶44

..2..

¶45

and 6 (Irrigation Department Engineers), under the RTI proceedings that due to the absence of details of survey numbers, the steps for survey could not be initially completed by the revenue and survey officials concerned and that later official respondents 5 and 6 by letter dated 27.5.2016 addressed to the 3^rd respondent Tahsildar, Kunnathunadu Taluk had furnished the details of the addresses of the parties concerned and the survey numbers of the respective properties but that further steps by the revenue and survey officials were not initiated by them. It is also stated in para.1 of Ext.P6 that the 6^th respondent-Executive Engineer of the Irrigation Department had also sought for police aid to ensure the effective completion of the survey, as disputes were raised by some neighbouring property owners, etc. The petitioner’s specific case is that in spite of proper request from respondent No.4-Taluk Surveyor as well as respondent Nos.5 and 6 (Engineers of the Irrigation Department), the requisite police aid was not rendered by respondent No.10. It is in the light of these factual averments that the petitioner has filed this writ petition (civil) with the following prayers:-

¶46

“a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ, order or direction directing Respondent 1 to 4 to complete the survey proceedings initiated vide Exhibit P4 notice, i.e. Proceedings No.C6-5162/2015 & C6-3629/17, within a time as may be specified by this Hon'ble court.

¶47

b) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other

¶48

W.P.(C)No.23048 of 2018

¶49

..3..

¶50

writ, order or direction directing Respondent No.10 to provide adequate assistance to Respondent No.4 for conducting survey of land which belongs to P.V.I.P at Morakkala.

¶51

c) Issue such other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit to issue and the petitioner may pray from time to time.”

¶52

Heard Sri.C.Dilip, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Sri.K.P.Madhu, learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents 1 to 6 and 10. In the nature of the orders proposed to be passed in this petition notice to contesting respondents 7 to 9 will stand dispensed with.

¶53

The learned Government Pleader appearing for the official respondents would submit that necessary steps will be taken by the competent revenue and survey officials, more particularly by respondent No.3-Tahsildar and respondent No.4-Taluk Surveyor to ensure that the matter in relation to the survey of the property concerned as referred to in Exts.P4 and P6 will be duly completed without much delay. Accordingly it is ordered that official respondents 3 and 4 should ensure that steps for completion of survey referred to in Exts.P4 and P6 are duly taken to ensure its finalisation and after issuing notices to the petitioner, contesting respondents 7 to 9 and any other affected parties, within four months from the date of production of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶54

W.P.(C)No.23048 of 2018

¶55

..4..

¶56

It is also made clear that, any one among the official respondents 1 to 6 will be at liberty to make a request for grant of police aid for the completion of the above process, if they are of the considered opinion that request for such police aid is necessary and if such a request in that regard is made before respondent No.10 the said authority will consider the same.

¶57

With these observations and directions the above writ petition (civil) will stand finally disposed of.

¶58

Sd/-

¶59

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶60

skj

K.v.Kuriakose v. District Collector, Ernakulam

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.v.Kuriakose v. District Collector, Ernakulam

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

Dhanesh Vs the Inspector General of Registration

Thomson @ Tomy Vs the State of Kerala

Divine Trust Vs State of Kerala

M.V Francis Oommen Vs State of Kerala

Deepthy Joy Vs the District Collector, Wayanad

Aleyamma Johnson Vs the Land Tribunal