Disposed

Hairunnisa Kulalinoda and Ors. v. the Union Territory of Lakshadeweep & or

Kerala HC15 Dec 2021WP(C)/11865/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of a writ petition by directing the first respondent to consider a specific representation (Ext.P6) and pass appropriate orders after giving the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within two months, without expressing any opinion on the case's merits.

What did the court decide?

1st respondent to consider Ext.P6 and pass appropriate orders after hearing petitioner; intimation within two months.

Hairunnisa Kulalinoda and Ors. Vs the Union… — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN WEDNESDAY, THE 15^TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2021 / 24TH

¶4

AGRAHAYANA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 11865 OF 2011

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1 HAIRUNNISA KULALINODA AND ORS. W/O.ABOOBACKER, AGATTI, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP,, PIN-682553.

¶8

2 MARIYAM LANGIYODA W/O.HABEEB, AGATTI, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP,, PIN682553.

¶9

3 MARIYOMMA ATTAM W/O.DR.RAHIMAN, IN DO. DO.

¶10

4 NAFEESA KATAMPALLI W/O.KASMI KOYA, IN DO. DO.

¶11

5 KAMARUNNISA KATAMPALLI W/O.MOHAMMED, IN DO. DO.

¶12

6 FATIMA KOTTA W/O.UMMER, IN DO. DO.

¶13

BY ADVS.
SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
SMT.GEETHA P.MENON
SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN

¶14

RESPONDENT/S:

¶15

1 THE UNION TERRITORY OF LAKSHADEWEEP & OR REP. BY ITS ADMINISTRATOR,, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI-682555.

¶16

2 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER ELE. DEPARTMENT OF ELECTRICITY,, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI-682555.

¶17

-2-

¶18

W.P.(C). No. 11865 of 2011

¶19

3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER LAKSHADWEEP PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT,, U.T. OF LAKSHADWEEP, KAVARATTI-682555.

¶20

4 P.SAYED KOYA CONTRACTOR KALPENI-682557.

¶21

BY ADVS.
SRI.MANU.S, SCGC, ADMINISTRATION OF THE UNION
TERRITORY OF LAKSHADWEEP
SHRI.SAJITH KUMAR V., SC, LAKSHADWEEP
ADMINISTRATION
S.MANU

¶22

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 15.12.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶23

-3-

¶24

W.P.(C). No. 11865 of 2011

¶25

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶26

W.P.(C) No. 11865 of 2011

¶27

Dated this the 15^th day of December, 2021

¶28

JUDGMENT

¶29

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

¶30

“(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to shift the power house of Agatti Island to an uninhabited location.

¶31

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 1 to 3 to constitute a committee to assess and pay damages to the residents of Agatti Island adversely affected by the functioning of the Power House.

¶32

(iii) Issue a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ, order or direction quashing Ext.P5.

¶33

(iv) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing respondent No.1 to consider and dispose of Ext.P6 within a time to be fixed by this Hon’ble Court.

¶34

-4-

¶35

W.P.(C). No. 11865 of 2011

¶36

(v) grant the petitioners such other appropriate reliefs that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to grant on the facts and circumstances of the case.

¶37

(vi) grant the petitioners such other appropriate interim reliefs that the petitioners pray from time to time during the pendency of this writ petition and that this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to grant.

¶38

(vii) award to the petitioners the costs of this writ petition.”

¶39

When this writ petition came up for consideration, the learned counsel for the petitioner confined his prayer for a consideration of Ext.P6 representation by the 1^st respondent. Since the prayer of the petitioner is limited, I think the same can be allowed, without expressing any opinion on merit.

¶40

Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of in the following manner:

¶41

The 1^st respondent will consider Ext.P6

¶42

representation and pass appropriate orders in it,

¶43

-5-

¶44

W.P.(C). No. 11865 of 2011

¶45

after giving an opportunity of hearing to the

¶46

petitioner, as expeditiously as possible.

¶47

The decision taken by the 1^st respondent will be intimated to the petitioner, within two months from

¶48

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶49

sd/-

¶50

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶51

das

¶52

-6-

¶53

W.P.(C). No. 11865 of 2011

¶54

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11865/2011

¶55

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶56

`Exhibit P1`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY` `THE RESIDENTS OF AGATTI ISLAND DATED` `01/06/2007.`
`Exhibit P2`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE` `CHAIRPERSON OF VILLAGE (DWEEP)` `PANCHAYAT, AGATTI TO THE 1ST` `RESPONDENT DATED 30/11/2009.`
`Exhibit P3`	`TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS F.` `NO.45/38/2010/DP (CA)/5208(K) ISSUED` `BY THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER,` `DISTRICT PANCHAYAT TO THE DIRECTOR OF` `PANCHAYATS DATED 6/2010.`
`Exhibit P4`	`TRUE COPY OF THE AGENDA POINTS OF THE` `COMMITTEE FOR CONSIDERING THE` `GRIEVANCES.`
`Exhibit P5`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER F. NO. 1/6/23010 B` `III/164 SENT BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO` `RESPONDENT NO.4.`
`Exhibit P6`	`TRUE COPY OF LETTER F. NO. 1/6/23010 B` `III/164 SENT BY RESPONDENT NO. 1 TO` `RESPONDENT NO.4 DATED 07/03/2011.`
`Exhibit P7`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF` `WELL WATER OF PETITIONER NO.3 DATED` `12/05/2011 DATED 12/05/2011.`
`Exhibit P8`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF ANALYSIS OF` `WELL WATER OF PETITIONER NO.4 DATED` `12/05/2011.`
`Exhibit P9`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF` `WELL WATER OF PETITIONER NO.5 DATED` `12/05/2011.`
`Exhibit P10`	`TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF` `WELL WATER OF PETITIONER NO.6 DATED` `12/05/2011.`

Hairunnisa Kulalinoda and Ors. v. the Union Territory of Lakshadeweep & or

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Hairunnisa Kulalinoda and Ors. v. the Union Territory of Lakshadeweep & or

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

Dr.Binu Ann Paul Vs N.a.Varghese and Others

M.Sakunthala Vs State of Kerala

Vijay Constructions Vs the Union of India

V.C.Fabitha Vs District Supply Officer

K.T. Abdurahiman Haji & Co. Vs District Supply Officer, Kozhikode

V.Chandran Vs State of Kerala