Disposed

Asokan.K v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC24 Jun 2022WP(C)/15203/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioner sought intervention for obstruction of his property pathway by respondents 3 and 4, alleging delay by Executive Magistrate. Court explored jurisdictional dispute over path status and disposed of petition directing First Respondent to examine complaints and pass orders within two months.

What did the court decide?

First Respondent directed to take up complaints P1 and P3, issue notice to Grama Panchayat, and pass appropriate orders within two months.

Asokan.K Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.G.ARUN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 15203 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONER/S:

¶6

ASOKAN.K
AGED 63 YEARS
S/O. KELAPPAN,
KIZHAKKEYIL HOUSE,
KUNNUMMAL AMSOM DESOM, VATAKARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
, PIN - 673507
BY ADV R.K.MURALEEDHARAN

¶7

RESPONDENT/S:

¶8

1THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
, PIN - 673101

¶9

2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,KUNNUMMAL VILLAGE OFFICE, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT , PIN - 673507

¶10

3 BABURAJ K.P., S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, AMALAKULANGARA, KUNNUMMAL AMSOM, VATTOLI DESOM, VATAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT , PIN - 673507

¶11

4MOHANDAS.K.P, S/O. BALAKRISHNAN, AMALAKULANGARA,
KUNNUMMAL AMSOM, VATTOLI DESOM, VATAKARA,
KOZHIKODE DISTRICT
, PIN - 673507
5ADDL. KUNNUMAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT
(SOUGHT TO IMPLEADED)
BY ADVS.
U.P.BALAKRISHNAN U P
K.R.AVINASH(A-692)
C.H.ABDUL RASAC(K/912/2005)

¶12

GP RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE

¶13

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶14

WP(C) NO. 15203 OF 2022

¶15

¶16

JUDGMENT Dated this the 24^th day of June, 2022

¶17

The petitioner alleges that the only access to his

¶18

property, a pathway vested with the Kunnumal Grama Panchayat, is being obstructed by respondents 3 and 4. He has therefore sought intervention of the Executive Magistrate by filing Exts.P1 and P3 complaints. The petitioner’s grievance is regarding the delay on the part of the Executive Magistrate in taking action based on his complaint.

¶19

I heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Counsel for respondents 3 and 4.

¶20

Learned Counsel for respondents 3 and 4 submitted that the pathway in question is not a public pathway and hence the Executive Magistrate has no power to entertain the complaints. Opposing the submission, learned Counsel for the petitioner asserted that the pathway is vested with the panchayat and the Executive

¶21

¶22

WP(C) NO. 15203 OF 2022

¶23

Magistrate is bound to order removal of the obstruction. Considering the limited relief sought, the Writ Petition is disposed of directing the first respondent to take up Exts.P1 and P3 and to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law. As necessitated, the first respondent shall issue notice to the Kunnumal Grama Panchayat also. The order, as directed above, shall be passed within two months of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

V.G.ARUN JUDGE

RK

WP(C) NO. 15203 OF 2022

¶28

¶29

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 15203/2022

¶30

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶31

Exhibit-P1TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 23.04.2022
Exhibit-P2TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE SAID
PATHWAY AND WORK UNDERTAKEN BY THE
RESPONDENTS 3 AND 4
Exhibit-P3TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE
PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT
DATED 28.04.2022 ALONG WITH THE RECEIPT
Exhibit-P4TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS NO.
116/97 BEFORE THE MUNSIFF COURT,
NADAPURAM DATED 29.09.2001
Exhibit-P5TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN SUBMITTED BY THE
ADVOCATE COMMISSIONER IN OS NO.
116/1997 BEFORE MUNSIFF COURT NADAPURAM

Asokan.K v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Asokan.K v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

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

Jayalakshmi Vs the State of Kerala

O.Suresh Babu Vs the Manager

Shobha S Vs the Sub Divisional Magistrate

Manager, Vs District Collector/Chairman

Joy Joseph Vs Devi Das

P.B.Khabeer Khan Vs State of Kerala