C.V.Raman vs the Assistant Executive Engineer

C.V.Raman vs The Assistant Executive Engineer

Type Court Judgment Court Kerala Decided Nov 20, 2020

~4 min read

https://sooperkanoon.com/case/1823926

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

Citation: sooperkanoon.com/1823926
Court: Kerala High Court
Judge: Honourable Mr. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V
Decided On: Nov 20, 2020
Case Number: WP(C)/25607/2020

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

C.V.Raman

Respondent

The Assistant Executive Engineer

Excerpt

.....view of the matter, i do not find any reason why the respondent no.1 has resorted to emergency provisions under the land conservancy act. having considered the materials produced, i am of the view that the respondent will have to consider his representation and peruse his records before proceeding with the removal of encroachment.6. in that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directingthe respondents to treat exhibit p3 as a notice under rule 12 of the rules. they shall take up ext.p4 representation submitted by the petitioner and with the aid of his title deeds ascertain whether there is any encroachment upon the puramboke land. the petitioner shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard and the copy of the demarcation sketch showing the nature of encroachment shall be handed over to the petitioner. the entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 8wp(c).no.25607 of 2020 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. if after the exercise, it is found that there has been encroachment upon puramboke land, the respondents shall proceed to remove the encroachment as per the provisions of the act of 1957 and the rules framed thereunder. sd/- raja vijayaraghavan v judge dsv wp(c).no.25607 of 2020 5appendix petitioner's/s exhibits: exhibit p1 true copy of tax receipt dt.6.11.2017 issued by the village office, kozhuppilly to the petitioner. exhibit p2 true copy of sketch prepared before conducting resurvey exhibit p2 (a) true copy of sketch prepared after conducting resurvey. exhibit p3 true copy of notice dated 9.10.2020 sent by r1 to the petitioner. exhibit p4 true copy of application dated 27.10.2020 submitted by the petitioner before r1. respondent's/s exhibits: nil//true copy// p.a.to judge

Full Judgment

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V FRIDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 29TH KARTHIKA, 1942 WP(C).No.25607 OF 2020(A) PETITIONER/S: C.V.RAMAN, AGED 80 YEARS, SON OF VELAYUDHAN EZHUTHACHAN, RESIDING AT CHEMMANAD HOUSE, MOORINIKARA, KOZHUKULLY P.O., THRISSUR -680 152. BY ADVS. SRI.K.RAMAKUMAR (SR.) SRI.T.RAMPRASAD UNNI SRI.S.M.PRASANTH SRI.G.RENJITH SMT.R.S.ASWINI SANKAR SRI.T.H.ARAVIND RESPONDENT/S: 1 THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (ROADS), OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER, CHEMBUKKAVU, THRISSUR-680 020. 2 THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS, THRISSUR RANGE, AYYANTHOLE P.O., THRISSUR -680 003. 3 THE TAHSILDAR, THRISSUR TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, THRISSUR -680 001. SRI K P HARISH, SR GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No.25607 OF 2020 2

JUDGMENT

On being served with a notice under Rule 13A of the Kerala Land Conservancy Rules, alleging that the petitioner has encroached upon the public road, the petitioner has submitted a detailed representation, a copy of which is produced as Exhibit-P4. It is the case of the petitioner that the property, which he is alleged to have encroached, was acquired by him on the strength of a registered Sale Deed. It is further submitted that there is no reason why the emergency provisions of the Land Conservancy Rules have been invoked.

2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that as is

evident from Exhibit-P3, the property has been clearly demarcated and it was finding that the petitioner had encroached upon .0008 Hectares of Puramboke land, that notice was issued to him to remove the encroachment.

3. I have heard Sri.Ramkumar, the learned Senior Counsel appearing

for the petitioner as instructed by Sri.Ramprasad Unni T as well as the learned Government Pleader. It is submitted by the learned Senior Counsel that the Assistant Executive Engineer, who has issued the notice, is not even authorised to issue such a notice.

4. In response, the learned Government Pleader submitted that now WP(C).No.25607 OF 2020 3

that the petitioner submitted Exhibit-P4, a copy of the demarcation sketch can be handed over and his representation shall be considered only thereafter that the matter shall be proceeded with. It is submitted that to ascertain whether there are any encroachments, the survey and demarcation sketch can be compared with the title deed of the petitioner.

5. I find from Ext.P1 that the petitioner has been remitting tax in respect of property having an extent of 9.5 cents and covered under Re-sy.No

before and after resurvey to substantiate that he has not committed any act of encroachment. In that view of the matter, I do not find any reason why the respondent No.1 has resorted to emergency provisions under the Land Conservancy Act. Having considered the materials produced, I am of the view that the respondent will have to consider his representation and peruse his records before proceeding with the removal of encroachment.

6. In that view of the matter, this writ petition is disposed of directing

the respondents to treat Exhibit P3 as a notice under Rule 12 of the Rules. They shall take up Ext.P4 representation submitted by the petitioner and with the aid of his title deeds ascertain whether there is any encroachment upon the puramboke land. The petitioner shall be afforded an opportunity of being heard and the copy of the demarcation sketch showing the nature of encroachment shall be handed over to the petitioner. The entire exercise shall be completed within a period of 8

WP(C).No.25607 OF 2020 4 weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. If after the exercise, it is found that there has been encroachment upon puramboke land, the respondents shall proceed to remove the encroachment as per the provisions of the Act of 1957 and the Rules framed thereunder. SD/- RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE DSV WP(C).No.25607 OF 2020 5

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF TAX RECEIPT DT.6.11.2017 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICE, KOZHUPPILLY TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF SKETCH PREPARED BEFORE CONDUCTING RESURVEY EXHIBIT P2 (A) TRUE COPY OF SKETCH PREPARED AFTER CONDUCTING RESURVEY. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 9.10.2020 SENT BY R1 TO THE PETITIONER. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION DATED 27.10.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE R1. RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL

//TRUE COPY// P.A.TO JUDGE

Same Court & Year Kerala · 2020 Same Parties C.V.Raman vs The Assistant Executive Engineer Same Judge Honourable Mr. Justice Raja Vijayaraghavan V