Disposed

Kunnappilly Venu Padmanabhan v. State of Kerala Rep by Its Secretary Department of Public Works

Kerala HC4 Mar 2024WP(C)/4272/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

A writ petition over an alleged encroachment of 2.92 cents of the petitioner's land during Metro Rail construction. The court disposed of the petition directing the Tahsildar to complete the survey proceedings requested in Exts.P7 and P8 within one month, with notice to the petitioner, PWD and KMRL.

What the court decided

AI extract

Kunnappilly Venu Padmanabhan Vs State of Kerala Rep by Its… — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

¶4

MONDAY, THE 4TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 14TH PHALGUNA, 1945
WP(C) NO. 4272 OF 2024

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

KUNNAPPILLY VENU PADMANABHAN
AGED 57 YEARS

¶7

S/O PADMANABHAN KUNNAPPILLY XVI/318, H-21 OF MARADU MUNICIPALITY,
FLAT NO. 10B OF KUNNAPPILLY BUILDERS, "THE IDENTITY", KUNDANOOR,
MARADU P.O ERNAKULAM., PIN - 682304

¶8

BY ADVS.
SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR
BENNY ANTONY PAREL
ANOOP SEBASTIAN
PRAMITHA AUGUSTINE
ADITHYA KIRAN V.E
ADRISYA S.

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA REP BY ITS SECRETARY DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶11

2 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PWD ROADS SUB DIVISION, ERNAKULAM, 28 CM + HCH, NGO QUARTERS - BHARATHMATHA COLLEGE ROAD, MYTHRIPURAM, VAZHAKKALA, KAKKANAD, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682021

¶12

3 KOCHI METRO RAIL LIMITED (KMRL) REPRESENTED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER, JLN METRO STATION, 4TH FLOOR, KALOOR, ERNAKULAM, KERALA REP BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR, PIN - 682017

¶13

4 THE TAHSILDAR (L R) KANAYANNOOR TALUK OFFICE, ERNAKULAM, PIN - 682011

¶14

BY ADVS.

¶15

K.JAJU BABU (SR.)(K/116/1981)

¶16

M.U.VIJAYALAKSHMI R3

¶17

OTHER PRESENT:

¶18

GP - AJITH VISWANATHAN

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.03.2024,

¶20

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

W.P(C) No.4272/2024

¶22

¶23

VIJU ABRAHAM, J

¶24

W.P(C) No. 4272 of 2024

¶25

Dated this the 04^th March, 2024

¶26

J U D G M E N T

¶27

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking a direction

¶28

to the 4^th respondent to complete the proceedings as requested in Exts.P7

¶29

and P8.

¶30

The petitioner is in possession of the property as per

¶31

Ext.P1 sale deed, having a total extent of 90 cents (36.42 Ares) of land

¶32

in Sy. No. 506/1, 506/13 and 514/10 in Kanayannur Taluk, Kakkanad

¶33

Village, Ernakulam. The grievance raised by the petitioner is that as part

¶34

of the construction of Metro Rail project, an extent of 2.92 cents (1.183

¶35

Ares) of property belonging to the petitioner have been encroached by

¶36

the Kochi Metro Rail Limited. The petitioner came to know about the encroachment only recently after the measurement by the Taluk Surveyor

¶37

was carried out pursuant to a direction issued by this Court as per the

¶38

W.P(C) No.4272/2024

¶39

¶40

judgment in WP(C) No.15684/2023. In such circumstances the petitioner without any delay approached the 3^rd respondent and preferred a representation detailing all the issues and urged to take appropriate action to redress the grievances highlighted in the complaint as per Ext.P3. Since no action was taken on Ext.P3, the petitioner approached this Court and as per Ext.P4 judgment disposed o WP(C)No.29391/2023,

¶41

directing the 2^nd respondent to hear the petitioner and pass appropriate orders. Thereafter the petitioner approached the 2^nd respondent with Ext.P5 detailed representation before the PWD authorities. The same was rejected by Ext.P6 communication without any factual analysis. Thereafter pursuant to a direction issued by this Court in W.P(C) No. 40541/2023, Ext.P7 proceedings was initiated by the 2^nd respondent, deciding to request the Tahsildar (LR) to conduct a survey of the petitioner’s property in the presence of PWD, KMRL and the petitioner and based on the said decision Ext.P8 request was made by the PWD before the 4^th respondent. The grievance raised by the petitioner is that no further proceedings were initiated pursuant to Exts.P7 and P8.

¶42

W.P(C) No.4272/2024

¶43

¶44

Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner, learned Government

¶45

Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the KMRL.

¶46

After hearing both sides, I am of the view that the issue could be resolved only on finalisation of the proceedings as requested in Ext.P7 and therefore the writ petition is disposed of with a direction to the 4^th respondent to complete the proceedings as stated in Exts.P7 and P8, at the earliest, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment with notice to the petitioner, 2^nd and 3^rd respondents.

¶47

Writ petition is disposed of.

¶48

Sd/VIJU ABRAHAM, Judge

¶49

jma

¶50

W.P(C) No.4272/2024

¶51

¶52

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4272/2024

¶53

`PETITIONER EXHIBITS`
`Exhibit P1`	`TRUE`	`COPY OF`	`THE`	`SALE DEED`	`NO.2359 OF 2019`
	`EXECU`	`TED BY`	`THE`	`PREVIOUS`	`OWNER OF THE`
	`PROPE` `22.08`	`RTY IN F` `.2019`	`AVOUR`	`OF THE`	`PETITIONER DATED`
`Exhibit P2`	`TRUE` `TALUK`	`COPY OF` `SURVEYOR`	`THE` `DATE`	`SKETCH` `D 4.7.202`	`PREPARED BY THE` `3`
`Exhibit P3`	`TRUE`	`COPY OF`	`THE R`	`EPRESENTA`	`TION PREFERRED BY`
	`THE` `DATED`	`PETITIONE` `14.8.202`	`R BE` `3`	`FORE THE`	`3RD RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P4`	`TRUE` `IN W` `COURT`	`COPY OF` `P©.NO, 2`	`THE` `9391/`	`JUDGMENT` `2023 OF`	`DATED 08.09.2023` `THIS HONOURABLE`
`Exhibit P5`	`TRUE` `THE` `DATED`	`COPY OF` `PETITIONE` `02.11.20`	`THE R` `R BE` `23`	`EPRESENTA` `FORE THE`	`TION PREFERRED BY` `2ND RESPONDENT`
`Exhibit P6`	`TRUE`	`COPY`	`OF`	`THE CO`	`MMUNICATION NO:`
	`KMRL/`	`PRJ/PH-II`	`RWIDE`	`/2016/272`	`0` `DATED`
	`20.11` `THE P`	`.2023 IS` `ETITIONER`	`SUED`	`BY THE 3`	`RD RESPONDENT TO`
`Exhibit P7`	`TRUE` `ISSUE` `JUDGM`	`COPY OF` `D BY THE` `ENT IN W`	`THE` `2ND` `P (C)`	`LETTER` `RESPONDENT` `NO: 4054`	`DATED 15.01.2024` `PURSUANT TO THE` `1/2023`
`Exhibit P8`	`TRUE` `THE T`	`COPY OF` `AHSILDHAR`	`THE C` `(LR)`	`OMMUNICAT` `DATED 15`	`ION FORWARDED TO` `.01.2024`

Kunnappilly Venu Padmanabhan v. State of Kerala Rep by Its Secretary Department of Public Works

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

Kunnappilly Venu Padmanabhan v. State of Kerala Rep by Its Secretary Department of Public Works

Case brief

What is this about?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Minil Kumar Vs District Collector

Basheer C.K Vs Additional District Magistrate

Nair Service Society Vs the Tahsildar(Lr)

K.R.Girijan Vs Dinesh Mon N.T

Baby Jaseena Vs the Kerala State Financial Enterprises

Johny K Vs Viswanathan