Government permission to retain slabs across an irrigation canal for access to apartment properties was challenged as involving public-land encroachment. The Court rejected the encroachment allegation, found no legal infirmity in the sanction, and dismissed the public interest writ petition.
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 THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF AUGUST 2020 / 22ND SRAVANA, 1942
WP(C).No.32407 OF 2011(S)
PETITIONER/S:
JIBIRI KANNU, S/O. AHAMMED KANNU, AGED 44, RESIDING AT TC.46/385, VALLAKADAVU P.O.,, MANIKKAVILAKOM,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.R.T. PRADEEP
RESPONDENT/S:
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-2-
REPRESENTED BYITS SECRETARY, CORPORATION BUILDING,, MUSEUM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 002.
SR.GP SRI. SURIN GEORGE IPE FOR R1 TO R7, R9 TO R12 AND R16,
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.08.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-3-
Dated this the 13TH day of August, 2020.
JUDGMENT
SHAJI P. CHALY, J
This is a Public Interest Litigation filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P27 order, by which respondent No. 13 namely Cherian A Paul, Mangalath House, Mummy's Colony, Kowdiar, Thiruvananthapuram, was allowed to retain the slab constructed by him over the drains to inter-connect properties allegedly encroaching the Government puramboke land.
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-4-
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-5-
the said representation. Other contentions are also raised and basically the crux of the contentions of the petitioner is centered around the allegation that a slab was being put up by respondent No. 13 across the drainage canal which cannot be permitted and therefore, the permission granted by the State Government as per Ext.P27 dated 01.10.2011 is illegal and arbitrary and liable to be interfered with by this Court.
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-6-
buildings are constructed in the property in question. The common judgment of this Court in W.P.(C) Nos. 14243 of 2010 and 12550 of 2011 dated 19.11.2011 is produced as Ext.R15(n) from where it is clear that positive directions were issued with respect to the reliefs sought for by respondent No.13.
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-7-
Therefore, according to the Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram, there is no illegality on their part in granting permit as is alleged in the writ petition.
“ORDER
The Assistant Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation Sub Division, Thiruvananthapuram had entered into an agreement dated 14.07.2007 with Sri. Xavi Mano Mathew, Power of Attorney holder of Sri.Cheriyan A Paul, owner of the buildings then proposed to be built in Sy.No.2606,2610 and 2605/2, near Aristo Junction, Thampanoor, Thiruvananthapuram, permitting to construct slab over the covered thodu to have an access to the proposed buildings. Finding absolute breach of agreement clauses in the construction of the slabs across the thodu, the Assistant Executive Engineer, vide his letter read as 1st paper above, directed sri.Xavi Mano Mathew to demolish the illegal constructions.
The petitioner, vide his representation read as 2nd paper above, requested to quash the order to dismantle the said slabs. The Chief Engineer, vide his letter read as 4th paper above, reported that
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-8-
the slab was constructed against the clauses of the agreement, but do not affect flow in the drain. It was also reported that, demolishing the slab is not required in the present scenario for mitigating flood. Further it was pointed out the fact that the agreement insisted the demarcation of Government land before the execution of the work.
Government examined the matter in detail. It was observed that permission for construction of slabs with structural stability over drains to inter connect properties without causing obstructions to the flow of water and on conditions to dismantle it at one's own risk and cost whereever required in an infrastructural necessity to provide access for developmental activities. Considering the scarcity of land in the State for infrastructural development, this is highly essential for making Kerala a Global Business Hub. In such case, it is natural that the slabs are to rest on protection wall of the thodu or cross the protection wall to rest on the connected property depending on the strength of the slab. If at all any thodu puramboke is involved, it will be of minimal extent. Considering the facts and in the view of the position as stated above, Government hereby order that the said slab shall be retained.
(By Order of the Governer) Anitha Damodaran Joint Secretary to Government”
Government has examined the matter in detail on the basis of the representation submitted by the property owners and found that considering the scarcity of land in the State for infrastructural development, it is highly essential that the permission is granted. It
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-9-
is specified thereunder that the slabs are to rest on the protection wall of the thodu (water channel) or cross the protection wall to rest on the connected property depending on the strength of the slab and if at all any thodu puramboke is involved, it will be of minimal extent and thereby, permitted respondent Nos. 13 and 15 to retain the slab put up by them. Anyhow, when the matter came up before this Court for consideration on 19.11.2012, an interim order was passed by this Court, which is extracted hereunder:
“The present writ petition is filed in the nature of Public Interest Litigation by the petitioner by name Jibiri Kannur contending, 13th respondent by name Cherian A Paul is allowed to retain the slab construction made by him over the drain to interconnect the properties belonging to him by encroaching the Government Puramboke land.
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-10-
“Considering the fact that the petitioner has expressed his willingness to clear the objections raised by the Corporation mentioned in the order dated 17.05.2011
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-11-
cancelling the building permit, W.P.(C) No. 12550 of 2011 is disposed of directing the Corporation to reconsider the order dated 17.05.2011 cancelling the permit and pass appropriate orders afresh, taking into consideration the subsequent developments and the directions in the judgment in W.P.(C) No. 14243 of 2010, after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner additional 5th respondent and other affected parties, if any, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The parties are at liberty to produce the materials in support of their respective contentions.”
In that view of the matter, there should not be any impediment for the respondent-Corporation to dispose of the matter as directed by the learned Single Judge in the above judgment. The learned counsel for the petitioner categorically expresses his opinion that he has nothing to do with other judgment dated 19.11.2011 and he is not aggrieved by the said direction. Apparently, there is no
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-12-
appeal filed by the present writ petitioner against the said judgment in W.P.(C) No. 14243 of 2010. In that view of the matter, we make it clear that the respondent Corporation need not wait for the proceedings in the present writ petition to be terminated for proceeding with the matter as per the directions of the learned Single Judge. Respondent-Corporation is given one month's time from the date of receipt of a copy of this order to comply with the directions of the learned Single Judge.”
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-13-
case that respondent Nos. 13 and 15 have encroached into the public property situated in re-survey Nos. 15 and 32 of Chengazhassery (Thycaud Village). Apparently, that issue was sorted out by the Additional Tahsildar on the basis of the queries raised by the Thiruvananthapuram Corporation evident from Ext. R15(P) dated 10.09.2012 from where it is evident that as per the joint inspection conducted by the Thiruvananthapurm Taluk Surveyor and Engineers of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation by measuring the property situated in in re-survey No.15, Block No. 110 of Thycaud Village, in accordance with the re-survey correlation and it was revealed that there is no puramboke land and that respondent No. 13 was having property only as per the settlement register of Chengazhassery (Thycaud Village). It is also specified thereunder that the Taluk Surveyor reports that the property involved is situated in old Survey Nos. 2606, 2610, 2611, 2596, 2597 and 2598 and further that respondent No. 13 had not encroached into any puramboke land. It is significant to note that according to the petitioner, the encroachment is made on the banks of the irrigation thodu running in between re-survey Nos. 15 and 32. However, re-survey of the property belonging to respondent No. 13 is re-Survey No. 15, block No. 110 which corresponds to the old survey numbers specified above. It is also important to note
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-14-
that the old survey numbers shown in Ext.R15 (P) communication of the Additional Tahsildar dated 10.09.2012 correspond to survey numbers shown in Ext.P7. Ext.R15(P) is extracted hereunder for convenience.
“No. C1-3904/11
Taluk Office, Thiruvananthapuram.
Additional Tahsildar, 10/09/2012
Secretary Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram.
Sir,
Sub: Encroachment of puramboke land-regarding. Ref: Letter No. E6/40303/11 dated 01.08.2012 issued by Corporation of Thiruvananthapuram.
Kindly refer the reference letter mentioned above. As per the joint inspection conducted by Thiruvananthapuram Taluk Surveyor and Engineers of Thiruvananthapuram Corporation followed by measuring the property in Thycaud village in Re-survey No.15, block No. 110 in accordance with the Resurvey correlation it is revealed that there is no puramboke land and petitioner is having property only as per the settlement register of Chengazhassery (Thycaud) Village. The Taluk Surveyour reports that, the property involved in the compliment ie., in old Survey Nos. 2606, 2610, 2611, 2596, 2597 and 2598, the petitioner had not encroached into any puramboke land.
Additional Tahsildar”
sd/-
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-15-
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-16-
Irrigation Department, after assimilating the facts situation and taking into account other relevant aspects which has got sufficient public importance, has thought it fit to grant permit to respondent Nos. 13 and 15 to lay concrete slabs across the Irrigation canal in order to have access to the property in question for carrying out construction of multi-storied apartment complexes. On going through Ext.P27, we are satisfied that the Government has taken into account the relevant aspects and on understanding the genuine need of respondent Nos. 13 and 15, sanction was accorded and it is clearly stated thereunder that if at all any puramboke property is involved in that process, it is only minimal in nature. But, fact remains, involvement of the puramboke property in the process of putting up slabs by the property owners is ruled out by the Village authorities as per Ext.R15(P) specified above. It is also well settled that every property owner is entitled to secure access from any public road, as of right and we do not understand how any third person can interfere with such a right enjoyed by a citizen. Moreover, Article 300A of the Constitution of India, protects the property rights of the citizens and when it is so, it should have a meaningful and purposive interpretation. Which thus means, the right to property protected under the Constitution is for enjoyment of the property by having access from a public road also. That said,
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-17-
we do not think the petitioner has made out any case of illegality on the basis of the Government permitting respondent Nos. 13 and 15 to construct slab across a canal.
Needless to say, writ petition has no sustenance and accordingly, it is dismissed.
sd/-
S. MANIKUMAR, CHIEF JUSTICE.
sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY, JUDGE.
Rv
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-18-
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
| EXHIBIT P1 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPROVED SITE PLAN DATED 20/07/2001 PERTAINING TO BUILDING PERMIT BAP 139/98. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P2 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE APPROVED SITE PLAN DATED 05/04/2010 PERTAINING TO BUILDING PERMIT NO.E6/BA-C-319.09. |
| EXHIBIT P3 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT BY ONE ANIL KUMAR DATED 10/11/2010 TO THE SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION. |
| EXHIBIT P4 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SHOW CAUSE NOTICE DATED 18/11/2010 ISSUED BY THE 8TH RESPONDENT WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P5 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.37689/2010 DATED 22/12/2010. |
| EXHIBIT P6 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE AGREEMENT WITH THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER VIDE AGREEMENT NO.2/2009 DATED 14TH JULY 2009. |
| EXHIBIT P7 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR DATED 07/02/2011 REQUESTING DEMOLITION OF THE ILLEGAL BRIDGE. |
| EXHIBIT P8 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPORT DATED 27/12/2010 OF THE SENIOR TOWN PLANNER (VIGILANCE) TO THE SECRETARY FO CANCELLING THE BUILDING PERMIT AND ITS ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P9 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPORT, MAHAZZAR, BTR ETC. DATED 18/02/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE THYCAUD VILLAGE OFFICER TO THE TALUK OFFICER REGARDING ENCROACHMENT WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P10 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAWYERS NOTICE ADDRESSED TO THE CHIEF SECRETARY DATED 26/03/2011 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P11 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAWYERS NOTICE ADDRESSED TO THE REVENUE SECRETARY AND OTHER SECRETARIES AND OFFICERS DATED 25/03/2011. |
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-19-
| EXHIBIT P12 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS NO. 18904/U1/2011/RD DATED 11/04/2011 OF THE ADDITIONAL CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT ISSUED TO THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR AND THE RDO. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P13 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REPORT OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TO ADDITIONAL SECRETARY, REVENUE (U) DEPARTMENT AND DISTRICT COLLECTOR VIDE PROCEEDINGS NO.18404/UI/11/RD DATED 27/04/2011. |
| EXHIBIT P14 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23/04/2011 SUBMITTED BY THE 13TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 11TH RESPONDENT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER. |
| EXHIBIT P15 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION DATED 26/04/2011 CANCELLING THE BUILDING PERMIT NO.E6/BA-C-319.09 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P16 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 16/05/2011 ISSUED BY THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, MINOR IRRIGATION DIVISION. |
| EXHIBIT P17 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER DATED 17/05/2011 OF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION STATING THE DETAILED REASONS FOR CANCELLING EXHIBIT P2 PERMIT WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P18 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER DATED 06/06/2011 OF THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR ADDRESSED TO THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P19 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER AND THE STATUTORY NOTICE IN FORM C DATED 28/07/2011 REQUIRING THE 13TH RESPONDENT TO VACATE THE PURAMBOKE LAND ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL TAHASILDAR WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P20 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02/08/2011 IN WPC NO.20585/2011. |
| EXHIBIT P21 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 03/08/2011 IN WPC NO.21143/2011. |
| EXHIBIT P22 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAWYERS NOTICE DATED 11/08/2011 ISSUED TO THE CHIEF SECRETARY, REVENUE SECRETARY AND OFFICERS OF THE |
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-20-
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE.
| EXHIBIT P23 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAWYERS NOTICE DATED 11/08/2011 ISSUED TO THE CHIEF SECRETARY, IRRIGATION SECRETARY AND OFFICERS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF IRRIGATION. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT P24 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER FROM THE CHIEF ENGINEER (IRRIGATION AND ADMINISTRATION) TO THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT WATER RESOURCES DATED 06/09/2011. |
| EXHIBIT P25 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE FILE NOTES APPROVED FOR ORDERS BY THE UNDER SECRETARY, JOINT SECRETARY AND THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. |
| EXHIBIT P26 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RELEVANT FILE NOTES OF THE MINISTER, WATER RESOURCES DEPARTMENT. |
| EXHIBIT P27 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF GO(RT) NO.999/2011/WRD DATED 01/10/2011. |
| EXHIBIT P28 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 02/08/2011 IN WA NO.1101/2011. |
| EXHIBIT P29 | TRUE COPY OF THE FIR DATED 03/11/2011 CRIME NO.1502/2011 WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION. |
| EXHIBIT P30 | TRUE COPY OF THE ENTIRE PROCEEDINGS OF THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 18/11/2011 (EXCEPT BTR) INCLUDING THE REPORT, MAHAZAR PERTAINING TO ENCROACHMENT, ENCROACHMENT SKETCH FROM TALUK SURVEYOR, SURVEY FIELD SKETCH OF BLOCK NO.110 OF THYCAUD VILLAGE AND FORM NO.A. |
| EXHIBIT P31 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT REGISTER OF THIRUVITHAMKOTTU STATE, CHENGAZHASSERY PAKUTHI PERTAINING TO OLD SY. NO.2587. |
| EXHIBIT P32 | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SURVEY SKETCH PERTAINING TO OLD SY. NO.2587. |
| EXHIBIT P33 | TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY RECEIVED FROM TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM (ALONG WITH TIS TRANSLATION) DATED 30/11/11, UNDER THE RTI ACT. |
| EXHIBIT P34 | THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE SURVEYOR ATTACHED TO THE TALUK OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 24/11/11 (ALONG WITH ITS TRANSLATION) AND THE ENCROACHMENT |
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-21-
SKETCH OF RE.SY.IN BLOCK NO.110 OF THYCAUD VILLAGE.
EXHIBIT P35 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF JAGPAL SINGH AND OTHERS V. STATE OF PUNJAB AND OTHERS REPORTED IN 2011 (1) SCALE 42. EXHIBIT P36 THE TRUE COPY OF TOWN FIELD REGISTER (COMMONLY KNOWN AS FAIR LAND REGISTER) PERTAINING TO RE.SY. 24 OF THYCAUD VILLAGE. EXHIBIT P37 THE TRUE COPY OF THE EXHIBIT R15(K) BY ROUGHLY INCORPORATING THE OMITTED RE. SY.24. EXHIBIT P38 THE TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO.41441/P1/96/RD DATED 28/09/1996 OF THE CHIEF SECRETARY. EXHIBIT P39 THE TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED TO THE THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION BY THE DYSP. VACB THIRUVANANTHAPURAM UNIT DATED 17/06/2011. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT R15 (A) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF POWER OF ATTORNEY EXECUTED BY 13TH RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR OF 15TH RESPONDENT DATED 29/03/2008. EXHIBIT R15(B) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMPLAINT NO.241/2010 FILED BY SMT. S. RADHAMMA BEFORE THE OMBUDSMAN FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. EXHIBIT R15(C) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF JOINT MEMO FILED BY SMT. RADHAMMA AND 15TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R15(D) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF ORDER IN APPEAL 408/2011 DATED 18/10/2011 BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS. EXHIBIT R15(E) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF SITE PLAN PREPARED BY 15TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R15(F) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT) 1506/96/LAD DATED 23/03/1996. EXHIBIT R15(G) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BUILDING PERMIT NO. BAP/139/98 DATED 20/07/2001 ISSUED BY 8TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT R15(H) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF GOVERNMENT ORDER GO(RT) NO.1152/2003/LSGD DATED 27/03/2003 ISSUED BY LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT (E) DEPARTMENT.
W.P.(C). No. 32407 of 2011
-22-
| EXHIBIT R15(I) | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF RENEWAL OF LICENCE UPTO 19/07/2010, VIDE NO.E6/TP3-47114/07 DATED 09/07/2009 ISSUED BY 8TH RESPONDENT. |
|---|---|
| EXHIBIT R15(J) | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF BUILDING CONSTRUCTION PERMIT NO.E6-BA-C-319/09 DATED 05/04/2010 ISSUED BY 8TH RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT R15(K) | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF REVISED PLAN SUBMITTED BY 13TH RESPONDENT AS PER DIRECTIONS IN WPC NO.37689/2010 DATED 22/12/2010. |
| EXHIBIT R15(L) | TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING THE TWIN MULTI STORIED CONSTRUCTION IN THE PROPERTY OF 13TH RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT R15(M) | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF APPLICATION UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED 20/07/2011 TO 12TH RESPONDENT, REPLY FROM 12TH RESPONDENT DATED 29/07/2011, WITH ENGLISH TRANSLATION AND AGREEMENT DATED 04/08/2008 BETWEEN 12TH RESPONDENT AND SRI. RAMASUBBU. |
| EXHIBIT R15(N) | TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF COMMON JUDGMENT IN WPC NOS. 14243/2010 AND 12550/2011 DATED 19/11/2011 OF HONOURABLE HIGH COURT OF KERALA. |
| EXHIBIT R15(O) | TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.7649/2012 DATED 18/06/2012. |
| EXHIBIT R15(P) | TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 10/09/2012 ISSUED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT R15(Q) | TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 7TH RESPONDENT DATED 18/10/2012. |
| EXHIBIT R15(R) | TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 18/10/2012 OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT. |
| EXHIBIT R15(S) | TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.E6-40303 DATED 15/02/2012 PASSED BY CORPORATION OF THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. |
| EXHIBIT R15(T) | TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL OPINION DATED 06/02/2012. |
| EXHIBIT R15(U) | TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 10/05/2012 PASSED BY THE TRIBUNAL FOR LOCAL SELF GOVERNMENT INSTITUTIONS, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM. |
2 issues framed by the court
Was Government sanction permitting retention of slabs across an irrigation canal for access to private properties unlawful?
Was the allegation that the construction encroached upon Government puramboke land sustainable?
JIBIRI KANNU
THE CHIEF SECRETARY TO GOVTERNMENT OF KERALA
CORPORATION OF THIRUVANNATHPAURAM
CHERIAN A PAUL
SOUTHERN HOSPITALITIES PVT LTD.
XAVI MANO MATHEW
S. MANIKUMAR
SHAJI P. CHALY
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
