Disposed

Abdul Salam v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC14 Sept 2022WP(C)/25522/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition challenged a proposal by the Grama Panchayat to construct a bus shelter in front of the petitioner's property, alleging it would block access. The Court directed the Panchayat to consider the petitioner's representation and take a decision after an opportunity of hearing.

What did the court decide?

The 3rd respondent is directed to consider Ext. P7 representation and take a decision within four weeks after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

Abdul Salam Vs State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 14^TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2022/23RD BHADRA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 25522 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER

¶7

ABDUL SALAM AGED 50 YEARS S/O.MUHAMMAD ALI, MAPLIKATTU HOUSE, PUKATTUPADI.P.O., ERNAKULAM DISTRICT PIN – 683165

¶8

BY ADVS. DINESH MATHEW J.MURICKEN K.A.ABHILASH VINOD S. PILLAI MOHAMMED THAYIB N.M. NAYANA VARGHESE AHAMMAD SACHIN K. K.S.SANGEETHA (KOOMBEL)

¶9

RESPONDENTS

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REP. BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, LOCAL ADMINISTRATION DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN – 695001

¶11

2 EDATHALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH EDATHALA NORTH.P.O., ALUVA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY PIN – 683564

¶12

W.P(C) No.25522 of 2022 2 ]

¶13

3 THE SECRETARY EDATHALA GRAMA PANCHAYATH, EDATHALA NORTH.P.O., ALUVA, PIN – 683564

¶14

BY ADV G.SANTHOSHKUMAR

¶15

SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN SR.GP

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.09.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

W.P(C) No.25522 of 2022

]

J U D G M E N T

Dated this the 14^th day of September, 2022

¶22

The petitioner is before this Court aggrieved by the

¶23

proposal of the 2^nd respondent-Grama Panchayat to construct a bus shelter in front of the property of the petitioner.

¶24

The petitioner states that he is possessing 0.81 square

¶25

metres of land comprised in Survey No.303/7-2 of Aluva East Village, Aluva Taluk with buildings bearing Nos.10/766A, 10/766B and 10/766C in Ward No.10 of the 2^nd respondentGrama Panchayat. On the western side of the property, there was a waiting shed long ago. According to the petitioner, the waiting shed was there 50 years ago. The bus stop was shifted to another place and the waiting shed was abandoned. Now, the 2^nd respondent-Grama Panchayat is taking steps to construct a new waiting shed, blocking the access to the

¶26

W.P(C) No.25522 of 2022 4 ]

¶27

petitioner's property.

¶28

The petitioner would state that he has a right of free access to his property and construction of a bus shelter right in front of his property will violate his fundamental and constitutional rights. The proposal for bus shelter at the location is therefore liable to be dropped.

¶29

Standing Counsel entered appearance and resisted the writ petition. On behalf of respondents 2 and 3, the Standing Counsel submitted that a bus shelter was in existence at the very same place. The Panchayat Authorities are constructing or rather renovating the bus stop at the same spot. The petitioner cannot therefore raise any grievance. Respondents 2 and 3 further submitted that there is no other suitable place to construct a bus stop anywhere else in the locality. The respondents further assured that the bus stop will be constructed in such a manner without blocking the entry and exit of the petitioner to his property.

¶30

W.P(C) No.25522 of 2022 5 ]

¶31

The Government Pleader entered appearance on behalf of the 1^st respondent and submitted that the issue can be considered by the Traffic Regulatory Committee of which the President of the Panchayat is the Chairman.

¶32

I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader for the 1^st respondent and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 2 and 3.

¶33

The petitioner's grievance is that by the construction of the proposed bus shelter, the free access to his property will be completely blocked. The petitioner's access to the 2^nd floor as well as access to the drinking water well will be affected. The petitioner has submitted Ext.P7 representation before the 3^rd respondent. In view of the grievance raised by the petitioner, this Court is of the view that the 3^rd respondent shall consider Ext.P7 representation submitted by the petitioner before finalising the proposal.

¶34

W.P(C) No.25522 of 2022 6 ]

¶35

The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 3^rd respondent to consider Ext.P7 representation and take a decision thereon within a period of four weeks, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶36

Sd/-

¶37

N. NAGARESH, JUDGE

¶38

smm/15.09.2022

¶39

W.P(C) No.25522 of 2022 ]

¶40

¶41

` APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25522/2022

¶42

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶43

Exhibit P1	TRUE COPY OF THE	SALE-DEED NO.6163/2004
	OF S.R.O. ALUVA DA	TED 17.12.2004
Exhibit P2	TRUE COPY OF T	HE BASIC-TAX RECEIPT
	ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE, DATED 11.0	ALUVA EAST VILLAGE 6.2021
Exhibit P3	TRUE COPY OF THE	PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT
	ISSUED BY THE	2ND RESPONDENT DATED
	01.02.2022 WITH BEARING NO.10/766-	RESPECT TO BUILDING A
Exhibit P4	TRUE COPY OF THE ISSUED BY THE	PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
	01.02.2022 WITH BEARING NO.10/766-	RESPECT TO BUILDING B
Exhibit P5	TRUE COPY OF THE	PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT
	ISSUED BY THE	2ND RESPONDENT DATED
	01.02.2022 WITH BEARING NO.10/766-	RESPECT TO BUILDING C
Exhibit P6	THE ROUGH SKETCH OF PROPERTY	OF THE 0.81 SQ.METERS
Exhibit P7	TRUE COPY OF SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT DAT	THE REPRESENTATION PETITIONER BEFORE THE ED 03.08.2022

Abdul Salam v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Abdul Salam v. State of Kerala

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

Shiju K. Vs the Secretary

C.M.Jayanand Vs State Transport Appellate Tribunal

Nasi. E.G, Vs the Authorized Officer

M/S. Servotech Power Systems Ltd. Vs Shri. C. N. Rajendra Kumar

Manoj Kumar Vs Mohanan

Anildath Kumar.P., Vs State of Kerala