Dismissed

Usha v. the Assistant Executive Engineer, Kwa

Kerala HC5 Oct 2020WP(C)/20086/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, a widow petitioner sought access to drinking water. The court observed a pipe was already laid and directed the Kerala Water Authority to act on a representation submitted by the petitioner to grant a water connection.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st respondent to take appropriate action on Ext.P8 representation to grant a water connection if no legal impediments exist.

Usha Vs the Assistant Executive Engineer, Kwa — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE SMT. JUSTICE P.V.ASHA

¶4

MONDAY, THE 05TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2020 / 13TH ASWINA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.20086 OF 2020(I)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

USHA, AGED 50 YEARS, W/O. LATE PRASANNAN, KANNANKARA VEEDU, WEST KALLADA P.O, KOLLAM - 691500.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.ARUN BABU

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, KERALA WATER AUTHORITY, WATER SUPPLY SECTION, SASTHAMCOTTAH, SASTHAMCOTTAH P.O, KOLLAM - 690521.

¶11

2 THE SECRETARY, WEST KALLADA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, NILANTHARA P.O, SASTHAMCOTTAH, KOLLAM - 690521.

¶12

3 BHAVANIMAYAN, AGED 39, S/O. SIVADASAN ACHARI, NARAYANEEYAM, AITHOTTUVA MURI, WEST KALLADA VILLAGE, WEST KALLADA P.O, KOLLAM - 691500.

¶13

4 BHAVANANTHANAN, S/O. SIVADASAN ACHARI, NARAYANEEYAM, AITHOTTUVA MURI, WEST KALLADA VILLAGE, WEST KALLADA P.O, KOLLAM - 691500.

¶14

BY ADVS.SRI.P.BENJAMIN PAUL, SC, KWA SRI.SIJU KAMALASANAN, SC

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 05.10.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P.(C) No.20086 of 2020

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner, who is a widow complains

¶20

that she is not getting drinking water. It is also stated that she had a Civil Suit, against her neighbours and Ext.P1 decree of injunction against obstruction from them in drawing the pipeline was in force till Ext.P3 judgment was rendered in the appeal.

¶21

2. However, petitioner submits that there is no orders prohibiting the Water Authority to provide water connection. Petitioner points out that the pipe is already laid and it is only a matter of granting connection from the public tap installed in the public road. It is stated that petitioner has submitted Ext.P8 representation before the Assistant Engineer, Kerala Water Authority, requesting for immediate action.

¶22

3. I heard the learned counsel for the

¶23

W.P.(C) No.20086 of 2020

¶24

¶25

petitioner, learned Standing Counsel for the Kerala Water Authority as well as the learned Standing Counsel for the Panchayath.

¶26

4. Petitioner points out that in case the Assistant Engineer takes action on Ext.P8, petitioner would be able to get drinking water.

¶27

Therefore this writ petition is disposed

¶28

of directing the 1^st respondent to see that appropriate action is taken on Ext.P8 representation submitted before the Assistant Engineer, in accordance with law and to grant water connection, in case there is no legal impediments.

¶29

Sd/P.V.ASHA JUDGE

¶30

¶31

W.P.(C) No.20086 of 2020

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1	THE TRUE COPY OF THE DECREE DATED 21.06.2012 IN OS NO.33/2009 OF THE MUNSIFF COURT, SASTHAMCOTTAH.
EXHIBIT P2	THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE METER INSTALLED BY THE WATER AUTHORITY IN THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3	THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
	18.02.2015 IN AS 29/12, OF SUB COURT KARUNAGAPPALLY.
EXHIBIT P4	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 03.08.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 03.08.2020 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT UNDER THE RTI ACT.
EXHIBIT P6	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 09.09.2020 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7	THE TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT BEFORE THE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION.
EXHIBIT P8	THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
	14.09.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Usha v. the Assistant Executive Engineer, Kwa

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Usha v. the Assistant Executive Engineer, Kwa

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

Carlos George Vs Dr.Vijayakumar.G.Sarkar

Mohanan v. Vs Kerala Water Authority

Mohanan v Vs Kerala Water Authority

Abhilash K.Thomas Vs the District Level Authorization Committee

Team One Advertising Company Pvt. Ltd. Vs Union of India

Niza Kaladharan Vs Mahatma Gandhi University