Kerala High Court
Mrs.Nazeema vs State Of Kerala Represented By Its on 24 May, 1995
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR
THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2016/2ND ASHADHA, 1938
WP(C).No. 18260 of 2016 (F)
--------------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
MRS.NAZEEMA, W/O.M.MOHAMMED ESSATH ALI,
AGED 53 YEARS,HOUSE NO.17, GHS LANE, MANACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.
BY ADV. SRI.G.SUDHEER
RESPONDENTS:
1. STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS
PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM 695 001.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT - 695 001.
3. THE SUB COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE,
THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM - 695 001.
4. THE TAHSILDAR, THIRUVANANTHAPRUAM
DISTRICT - 695 001.
5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUTTAHTAR VILLAGE,
THIRUVANANTHPARUAM - 695 001.
6. THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,
MINOR IRRIGATION DEPARTMENT, PMG,
THIRUVANANTHPAURAM - 695 001.
BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.GIKKU JACOB
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23-06-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
APPENDIX IN WP(C).No. 18260 of 2016 (F)
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXT. P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1675/95 DATED 24.5.1995
EXECUTED BY MRS.MO.O.JASMIN & ANOTHER IN FAVOUR OF
MRS.NAZEEMA
EXT. P1(a) TRUE ENGLISH TRANSLATION OF EXT.P1
EXT. P1(b) TRUE COPY OF GIFT DEED NO.2370/95 DATED 25.5.1995
EXECUTED BY THE PETITIONER'S PARENTS
EXT. P1(c) TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 28.4.2015 ISUED BY THE
VILLAGE OFICER, MUTTATHARA
EXT. P2 TRUE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER
EXT. P3 TRUE COPY OF THE PETITION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 6.7.2015
EXT. P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. L/13257/15 DATED 23.7.2015
SENT BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXT. P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT TO THE 3RD
RESPONDENT NO. 501/2015 DATED 27.7.2015
EXT. P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. L/13257/15 DATED 29.7.2015 SENT
BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE 4TH RESPONDENT
EXT. P6 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT AND SKETCH SENT BY THE
ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 11.11.2015
EXT. P7 TRUE COPY OF THE PERMIT AND PLAN SANCTIONED BY THE
SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM CORPORATION DATED 21.7.2015
EXT. P8 TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO NO.413/2016 DATED 27.4.2016
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MUTTATHARA
EXT. P9 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. M.9.A.T-9/16 DATED 3.5.2016
ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL.
/TRUE COPY/
P.S. TO JUDGE
P.B.Suresh Kumar, J.
------------------------------------------
W.P.(C)No.18260 of 2016 F
-------------------------------------------
Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2016
JUDGMENT
While removing the filth and dirt accumulated in the water body called Kariyil Thodu by the authorities under the Disaster Management Act, a portion of the retaining wall of the property of the petitioner happened to be damaged. The petitioner thereupon attempted to restore the retaining wall of her property. The fourth respondent has prevented the restoration work by issuing Exhibit P8 memo. Exhibit P8 memo is under challenge in this writ petition.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the fourth respondent in the writ petition. Paragraph 7 of the counter affidavit reads thus:
"It is respectfully submitted that the stop memo was issued when it was noticed that under the guise of reconstruction of the compound wall, WPC 18260/16 2 illegal filling are undertaking by the petitioner. It is at that juncture that the said stop memo had been issued. The stop memo so issued had now been withdrawn and therefore the course of action no longer survives. The Village Officer and the revenue staffs attached to the said office is vigilant to see that the petitioner shall not engage in the large scale filling under the guise of protection of his property. As respect the prayer for construction of retaining wall is concerned, the Minor Irrigation Department will construct the retaining wall which was demolished during the 'Operation Ananda' Programme. Therefore, there is absolutely no subsisting grievance for redressal."
In the light of the undertaking given by the fourth respondent in the counter affidavit that the retaining wall of the property of the petitioner will be restored by the Minor Irrigation Department of the State Government, the writ petition is disposed of directing the sixth respondent to complete the construction of the retaining wall of the property of the petitioner within six months from today.
P.B.Suresh Kumar, Judge tkv