Disposed

Rajendran.O.P v. District Collector

Kerala HC18 Feb 2020WP(C)/3930/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition challenging the lack of implementation of an order to cut a reserved rosewood tree, the Kerala High Court directed respondents to implement the order within one month while ensuring the tree owner receives notice and the matter is heard before action is taken.

What did the court decide?

Direction to implement the order within one month, with notice to the tree owner and hearing before implementation.

Rajendran.O.P Vs District Collector — Environment and Pollution | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2020 / 29TH MAGHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.3930 OF 2020(M)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

RAJENDRAN.O.P AGED 50 YEARS OTHAYOTTHUM PADIKKAL HOUSE, MUTTIL P.O., VARYAD, WAYANAD - 673 122

¶8

BY ADV. SMT.JAYASREE K.P.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR COLLECTORATE WAYANAD, NORTH KALPETTA P.O., WAYANAD - 673 121

¶11

2 TAHSILDAR VYTHIRI TALUK OFFICE, VYTHIRI, WAYANAD - 673 576

¶12

3 SMT.PRASANNA CHAKKALAYIL HOUSE, MUTTIL P.O., VARYAD, WAYANAD - 673 122

¶13

*** FOREST RANGE OFFICER Addl.4 KALPETTA, WAYANAD DISTRICT PIN-673121 (ADDITIONAL RESPONDENT NO.4 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 18.02.2020 IN I.A.NO.1/2020)*

¶14

GP. SMT. VINITHA B

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.02.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

WP(C).No.3930 OF 2020(M)

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The prayer of the petitioner in this writ petition is for the implementation of Ext.P1 order passed by the District Collector directing the cutting and removing of the branches of an old reserved rosewood tree standing on the property of the 3^rd respondent in the presence of the Village Officer as well as the Forest Officer.

¶20

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. In view of the direction being issued, notice to the 3^rd respondent is dispensed with.

¶21

It is submitted by the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, that Ext.P1 can be implemented with due notice to all concerned including the Forest Range Officer. It is, therefore, contended that appropriate steps for implementation of Ext.P1 will be taken by the competent authorities without delay.

¶22

There will, accordingly, be a direction to the respondents to see that Ext.P1 order is implemented in full, in the presence of the Village Officer and the Forest Range Officer as directed in Ext.P1. The 3^rd respondent shall also be

¶23

WP(C).No.3930 OF 2020(M)

¶24

¶25

put on notice and heard before such implementation. Appropriate action shall be taken within a period of one

¶26

month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶27

This writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Bng/18.02.2020

WP(C).No.3930 OF 2020(M)

¶32

¶33

APPENDIX

¶34

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶35

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.B32017/28679/12 DATED 03.08.2018 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER AND THE 3RD RESPONDENT

¶36

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.02.2019 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶37

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 08.08.2019 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 22.02.2019 SENT BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P5 TRUE RECENT PHOTOGRAPHS (2 IN NUMBER) OF THE CONDITION OF THE TREE

Rajendran.O.P v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rajendran.O.P v. District Collector

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

Sarngadharan N., Vs the Additional Chief Secretary

Daisy Mathai, Vs District Collecotr, Kozhikode District

Shiny P.R Vs State of Kerala

Anandu Sujith, Vs the Secretary

Biju.a., Vs State of Kerala

M/S Malabar Plus Constructions, Vs State of Kerala