Allowed

Shaji a. D. v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor

Kerala HC17 Feb 2021WP(C)/18321/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The petitioner complained about flooding due to stream obstruction on his land used for farming and aquaculture. After a responsive officer found the grievance genuine and forwarded it to the Panchayat Secretary, the latter failed to act. This court directed the Secretary to remove the obstruction within six weeks.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the fourth respondent to remove the obstruction in the stream within six weeks from receipt of the judgment copy.

Shaji a. D. Vs Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor — Municipal and Town Planning | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 28TH MAGHA,1942

¶5

WP(C).No.18321 OF 2020(M)

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SHAJI A. D., S/O. V. K. DIVAKARAN, ALINTE KIZHAKETHIL VEEDU, MEZHUVELI P. O., PATHANAMTHITTA - 689 507.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.A.RAJASIMHAN K.J.RAJAN

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR, ADOOR P. O., PATHANAMTHITTA - 691523.

¶11

2 VILLAGE OFFICER, VILLAGE OFFICE, MEZHUVELI P. O., PATHANAMTHITTA - 689507.

¶12

3 MEZHUVELI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MEZHUVELI P. O., PATHANAMTHITTA - 689507, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶13

4 SECRETARY, MEZHUVELI GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MEZHUVELI P. O., PATHANAMTHITTA - 689507.

¶14

R3&R4 BY SRI.SUNIL JACOB JOSE, STANDING COUNSEL R1&R2 BY SRI.K.J MANURAJ, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 17.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P.(C)No.18321 of 2020

¶17

¶18

W.P.(C)No.18321 of 2020

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

Petitioner owns a land measuring 14 ares and 10 square metres within the limits of the third respondent Panchayat. It is stated that the petitioner is conducting farming and aquaculture in the said land. The land of the petitioner is abutting a stream on its west and north sides. It is stated that on account of the obstructions to the free flow of water in the stream, there is freq uent flooding fro m the stream which is affecting the activities undertaken by the petitioner in his land adversely. The petitioner, therefore, lodged a complaint to the first respondent. The first respondent caused an enquiry to be made on the complaint and found in the enquiry that the grievance of the petitioner is genuine. The first respondent, in the circumstances, forwarded the complaint for appropriate action to the fourth respondent, the Secretary of the third respondent Panchayat. Ext.P3 is the communication issued by the first respondent to the fourth respondent in this connection. The grievance of the petitioner in the writ petition concerns the inaction on the part of the fourth respondent in taking action on Ext.P3.

¶21

Though notice was issued to respondents 3 and 4, there is no appearance for them.

¶22

In so far as it is found by the first respondent that there is obstruction in the stream referred to in the writ petition which is vested in

¶23

W.P.(C)No.18321 of 2020

¶24

¶25

the Panchayat under Section 218 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994, the fourth respondent is bound to take appropriate action to remove the said obstruction.

¶26

In the circumstances, the writ petition is disposed of directing the fourth respondent to take action to remove the obstruction caused to the stream referred to in the writ petition in accordance with law. This shall be done at any rate, within six weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶27

Sd/- P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE

¶28

rkj

¶29

W.P.(C)No.18321 of 2020

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 17.08.2020 ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE, MEZHUVELI. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITIONER'S COMPLAINT DATED 20.05.2020 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27.07.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Shaji a. D. v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shaji a. D. v. Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor

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

J and P Sand and Aggregates International Pvt. Ltd., Vs State of Kerala

Raji Mathew Vs Union of India

Saheeda Kunju Muhammed Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Selil Moideen, Vs Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority

C.K.Ponnappan Vs the District Collector

Dr.Sreekumaran Nair Vs Union of India