Remanded

Ushakumari v. Chithara Grama Panchayat (Special Grade)

Kerala HC6 Jul 2022WP(C)/31995/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition challenging a Panchayat notice to demolish alleged encroachment allowed. Court set aside the notice, directed a survey, and reinstated status quo pending final orders after a fresh hearing with opportunity for additional representation.

What did the court decide?

Impugned notice (Ext.P-4) set aside; respondents directed to reconsider after survey and hearing; status quo maintained until final orders.

Ushakumari Vs Chithara Grama Panchayat (Special Grade) — Landlord and Tenant | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 6^TH DAY OF JULY 2022 / 15TH ASHADHA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

1 USHAKUMARI AGED 57 YEARS W/O SURENDRAN, RESHMA BHAVAN, UNNIMUKKU, CHITHARA VILLAGE, PIN:691 559. 2 SURENDRAN AGED 63 YEARS S/O KUNCHU, RESHMA BHAVAN, UNNIMUKKU, CHITHARA VILLAGE, PIN:691 559. BY ADVS. SRI.T.M.ABDUL LATHEEF SRI.A.MOHAMED RASHEED

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 CHITHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT (SPECIAL GRADE) CHITHARA P.O., KOLLAM-691 559, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY. 2 SECRETARY SPECIAL GRADE CHITHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT (SPECIAL GRADE), CHITHARA P.O., KOLLAM-691 559. 3 VILLAGE OFFICER CHITHARA VILLAGE, CHITHARA-691 559. BY ADVS. SRI.ANOOP.V.NAIR SRI.M.R.JAYAPRASAD SRI.P.MOHANDAS ERNAKULAM DR.K.P.SATHEESAN SR. SRI.S.VIBHEESHANAN SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GOVERNMENT PLEADER THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06.07.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶10

WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013

¶11

¶12

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.

¶13

------------------------------

¶14

W.P.(C).No. 31995 of 2013

¶15

Dated this the 06^th day of July, 2022

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The above writ petition is filed with the following

¶18

prayers:

¶19

“(i) To call for the records relating to Ext.P-1 to P-5 and to issue a writ of certiorari quashing Ext.P-4 notice and further proceedings;

¶20

(ii) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding the Respondents 1 and 2 not to cause any obstruction in the construction of compound wall by the Petitioners in their property covered by Exts.P-1 and P-2 documents;

¶21

(iii) To issue a writ of mandamus commanding the 2^nd Respondent to measure out the width of the road stated in Ext.P-4 notice based upon the records maintained in the Panchayath and Village Offices including the Roads Register of Panchayat wherein the width of the Road is stated and to fix the boundary accordingly at the north side of the Petitioner's property adjoining to the Panchayat Road;

¶22

(iv) Any other appropriate, writ, order or direction also may be granted to meet out justice under the circumstances of the above case.”[SIC]

¶23

WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013 3

¶24

This writ petition is filed mainly challenging Ext.P4 order by which the 1^st respondent Panchayath directed the petitioners to demolish an unauthorized construction made by the petitioners encroaching the Panchayath road. The petitioners submitted Ext.P5 reply to the Panchayath. Thereafter this writ petition is filed.

¶25

Heard counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Government Pleader.

¶26

This Court perused Ext.P4 notice issued by the Panchayath. According to the Panchayath there is encroachment. According to the petitioners, there is no encroachment. If that is the case, this can be easily find out by conducting a survey of the property of the petitioner and the road. The Panchayath can peruse the relevant documents. Ext.P6 is the location sketch showing the property of the petitioner and the road. Perusing these documents, the Panchayath can easily find out whether there is any encroachment or not. As I stated earlier, the petitioner already submitted Ext.P5 explanation. But the petitioner is free to submit an

¶27

WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013

¶28

¶29

additional representation also, producing additional documents, if any. For facilitating the Panchayath to pass fresh orders, Ext.P4 can be set aside.

¶30

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following manner:

¶31

i. Ext.P4 is set aside.

¶32

ii. The 1^st and 2^nd respondents are directed to

¶33

reconsider the matter after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

¶34

iii. The 1^st and 2^nd respondents will conduct a

¶35

survey and verify all documents available before deciding the matter.

¶36

iv. The petitioner is free to file an additional representation also producing additional documents, if any.

¶37

v. The status quo as on today will be

¶38

maintained till final orders are passed by respondents 1 and 2.

¶39

Sd/-

¶40

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE

¶41

¶42

¶43

WP(C) NO. 31995 OF 2013

¶44

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 31995/2013

¶45

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶46

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF TH ESALE DEED NO.2011/2011 DATED 12.8.2011.

¶47

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT NO.1328021 DATED 10.5.2013.

¶48

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE JNO.A3-6527/2013 DATED 11.10.2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶49

EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE NO.730/13 DATED 12.11.2013 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶50

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE OBJECTION DATED 10.12.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE FIRST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

¶51

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS: NIL

¶52

//TRUE COPY//

¶53

PA TO JUDGE

Ushakumari v. Chithara Grama Panchayat (Special Grade)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ushakumari v. Chithara Grama Panchayat (Special Grade)

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

Sister Remya Vs State of Kerala

Jagadamma P Vs State of Kerala

Shajprasanth K.A. Vs State of Kerala

Parappurath Kanakathan Vinod Vs Pinarayi Grama Pancjayat

P.M.Jose and Others Vs Nedumbassery Grama Panchayat

Kunhimoosa Vs State of Kerala