Petitioner sought writ of mandamus preventing forest officials from interfering with construction on her private property. Court found no evidence of harassment; closed writ and directed petitioner to approach superior authorities for grievances.
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 V.G.ARUN
WEDNESDAY,THE 20TH DAY OF MARCH 2019 / 29TH PHALGUNA, 1940
WP(C).No. 39574 of 2016
PETITIONER/S:
ZEENATH BEE FREDERIC MARI, AGED 35 YEARS, W/O. MR.FREDERIC MARI, DOOR NO.2, RAJARAJAN STREET, VANARAPET, PONDICHERRY VILLAGE, PONDICHERRY TALUK, PONDICHERRY UNION TERRITORY.
BY ADVS. SRI.G.HARIHARAN SMT.A.ANJANA SMT.SMITHA PRAVEEN SRI.M.V.VIPINDAS SRI.PRAVEEN HARIHARAN SRI.SHINE VARGHESE
RESPONDENT/S:
1 MR. PRINCE, FOREST GUARD, AYYAPPANKOVIL FOREST STATION, AYYAPPANKOVIL P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT - 685 507.
2 RANGE OFFICER, AYYAPPANKOVIL FOREST RANGE,AYYAPPANKOVIL FOREST STATION, AYYAPPANKOVIL P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN - 685 507.
R2-R5, SRI.SANDESH RAJA.K., SPL. G.P.(FOREST)
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 20.03.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 39574 of 2016
2
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed voicing an
apprehension that 1st and 2nd respondents, who were the Forest Guard and Range Officer respectively at the Ayyappankovil Forest Station, may interfere with the construction of the building carried out by the petitioner on the strength of a valid permit, in her own property, which is neither a forest land nor a
tribal land.
a writ of mandamus restraining the 1st and 2nd
respondents from harassing the petitioner and from interfering with the construction of a building by
the petitioner on the strength of Ext P4 permit. In
the counter statement filed on behalf of the 3rd
respondent it is stated the 1st respondent was assigned had been assigned perambulation duty as per
instructions of the Deputy Range Forest Officer.
That, on 07.09.2016, while the 1st respondent was on
duty along with co-staff, they got information that construction work was going on near reserved forest
area of 1967 Teak Plantation, Mattappally and that
WP(C).No. 39574 of 2016
3 waste from the construction site was about to be
dumped in the forest land near to the construction. Thereupon, the forest staff rushed to the spot and instructed the construction workers not to dispose any waste into the forest land. From nature and lie of the property the forest staff entertained a doubt as to whether there were reserved trees in the land where construction was being carried out by the petitioner. Therefore, the workers at the site was requested to show a copy of the patta of the land, which they were not able to. Therefore, the workers were asked inform the owner of the land that patta should be produced at the forest office. That, this was informed to the Deputy Range Forest Officer and other than that nothing was done by the 1st and 2nd respondents. It is evident from the statement that other than carrying out their routine duties, respondents 1 and 2 had not indulged any sort of harassment as alleged in the writ petition.
In the circumstances the writ petition is closed making it clear that in the event of there being any
illegal action from the part of the forest
WP(C).No. 39574 of 2016
4
officials, it will be open for the petitioner to
voice her grievances before the superior authorities
in the forest department.
Sd/-
V.G.ARUN
JUDGE
SPR
WP(C).No. 39574 of 2016
5 APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED BEARING NO. 789/2016 DATED 21.3.2016 OF SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE KATTAPPANA. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 20.9.2016 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KARUMALLUR VILLAGE. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 22.9.2016 RELATING TO THE PROPERTIES MENTIONED IN EXT.P1 BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING PERMIT DATED 20.10.2016 ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY, KANCHIYUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE GENUINITY CERTIFICATE DATED 10.12.2015 ISSUED BY THE THASILDAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS
ANNEXURE R3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF FIRST RESPONDENT. ANNEXURE R3(b) TRUE COPY OF THE GENERAL DIARY OF KANCHIYAR FOREST STATION DATED 07.09.2016. ANNEXURE R3(c) TRUE COPY OF THE STATEMENT OF DEPUTY FOREST OFFICER OF KANCHIYAR FOREST STATION. ANNEXURE R3(d) TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 29.12.2016.
1 issue framed by the court
Whether the petitioners apprehension of interference by forest officials during construction of a building on her property warrants issuance of writ of mandamus restraining them.
Zeenath Bee Frederic Mari
Mr. Prince
Range Officer
Divisional Forest Officer
The Principal Secretary to Government
Director of Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau
V.G.Arun
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
