JUDGMENT

1. The Petitioners in these two writ petitions are the residents on the sides of Edamuttom Beach - Jawan Corner Panchayat Road (‘the road’ in short) which has been lying east-west starting towards west from National Highway lying north-south. The parties and documents are referred as per the descriptions in W.P.(C) No.26765/2016 unless otherwise specifically stated.

2. The Petitioners’ grievance is with regard to the demolition of their boundary walls & gates, cutting aged old trees and encroachments into their properties by the respondents 1 to 6 & 8 under the guise of road widening. According to them, few unknown persons headed by respondents 2 to 6 of which the 4th respondent identified himself as a contractor engaged by the respondents 1 to 3 have done the above illegal acts using JCBs with the active supports of the respondents 1 to 3.

3. The petitioners filed this writ petition contending that they had no notice or intimation from the respondents 1 to 3 about their proposal for the development of the road; that there is not even a decision by the Panchayat to widen the road; that there is no land acquisition proceedings so as to acquire the petitioners' properties; that they were not informed about any acquisition proceedings and that the action of the respondents 1 to 3 are in clear violation of the provisions of Sec. 178 of Kerala Panchayat Raj Act as well as the provisions under the Kerala Panchayat Raj (Acquisition and Disposal of Property) Rules, 2005.

4. W.P.(C) No.26765/2016 was filed on 10/08/2016 and interim order therein was passed on 11/08/2016 as prayed for and appointing an Advocate Commissioner to measure out the petitioners’ properties and to file report as to the averments made in the writ petition.

5. W.P.(C) No.30778/2016 was filed on 19/09/2016 and interim order therein was passed on 22/09/2016 as prayed for and appointing an Advocate Commissioner to measure out the petitioner’s property and to file report as to the averments made in the writ petition.

6. The case of the petitioners is that in spite of the Interim Orders, the respondents continued with the road construction. Though the petitioner in W.P(C) No.30778/2016 filed Contempt case (Civil) No.603/2017 alleging violation of the interim order, the same was disposed by judgment dated 12/01/2018 directing the petitioner to agitate the cause in the writ petition itself. The learned counsel for the petitioner made available the copy of the said order.

7. The 1st respondent filed Counter affidavits dated 20/12/2017 in both the writ petitions stating that the road widening was not undertaken by the 1st respondent; that the said Project was undertaken by Thalikkulam Block Panchayat under the Prime Minister Grameen Sadak Yojana( PMGSY); that on the request of the 8th respondent as per Letter dated 23/11/2015 to take immediate action to hand over land belonging to the Panchayat for road widening, the 1st respondent passed Resolution dated 04/12/2015 handing over puramboke land belonging to the Panchayat; and that part from this, the 1st respondent has no role in the road widening works undertaken by the Thalikkulam Block Panchayat.

8. The 8th respondent filed Counter Affidavit dated 29/06/2017 in W.P(C) No.30778/2016 contending, inter alia, that an agreement was executed between the fourth respondent and Kerala State Rural Road Development Agency for upgradation of Edamuttom North- Kothakulam West Road within the local limits of the 1st respondent Panchayat under PMGSY Project; that site was handed over to the fourth respondent on 25.11.2015; that in response to the letter dated 23.05.2011 issued by the 1st respondent the first respondent Panchayat passed a resolution on 04.12.2015 to handover sufficient land for the road to the 8th respondent; that while the work was progressing an unofficial committee by name Road Development Committee was formed by the local people which demolished the compound wall, trees etc. of the petitioners either by as instr