Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 17788
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
DIVAKARAN K.R | SASI N.U – Appellant
Versus
MATTATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT – Respondent
WP(C) 19892/2021
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SRI.T.KABIL CHANDRAN
For the Respondents: SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY, SRI.M.R.VENUGOPAL, SRI.K.T.BOSCO, SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN (SR.), SMT.P.DARLY JOHN
The court reaffirmed that decisions by local authorities must be respected unless clear legal wrongs are established, emphasizing statutory remedies under relevant laws.
Headnote:The petitioners challenge the decision of the Panchayat not to act on their complaint regarding encroachment on public property, citing Section 2(20) of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act. The respondents argue that the encroachment is lawful as permissions were granted for the construction. The court confirms the legal standing of the Panchayat's decision and highlights the availability of a statutory remedy per Section 276 of the Act. As such, the petition is dismissed.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM TUESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF JUNE 2025 / 13TH JYAISHTA, 1947 WP(C) NO. 19892 OF 2021 PETITIONERS:
1 DIVAKARAN K.R AGED 58 YEARS S/O RAMAN, KUCHILIKADAN HOUSE, CHETTICHAL, CHEMBUCHIRA P.O.THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680684.
2 SASI N.U, AGED 66 YEARS S/O UNNICHEKKAN, NADAPARAMBAN HOUSE, CHETTICHAL, CHEMBUCHIRA P.O.THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680684.
BY ADV SRI.T.KABIL CHANDRAN RESPONDENTS:
1 MATTATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT MATTATHUR P.O.KODAKARA, THIRISSUR, PIN-680 684, REP BY THE SECRETARY
2 THE SECRETARY MATTATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MATTATHUR P.O.KODAKARA, THIRSSUR, PIN-680 684.
3 THE ASSISTANT ENGINEER LID&EW, MATTATHUR GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MATTATHUR P.O.KODAKARA, THIRSSUR, PIN-680 684.
4 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, CIVIL STATION, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 003.
5 RAMAKRISHNAN ALIAS KRISHNAN, AGE NOT KNOWN, S/O KUNNAYYAPPAN, VAIDYAKARA, CHALAKUDI TALUK, MATTATHUR VILLAGE, CHETTICHAL DESOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 684.
6 SUDHAKARAN, AGE NOT KNOWN , S/O KUNNAYYAPPAN, VAIDYAKARA, CHALAKUDI TALUK, MATTATHUR VILLAGE, CHETTICHAL DESOM, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN-680 684.
BY ADVS.
SRI.B.ASHOK SHENOY SRI.M.R.VENUGOPAL SRI.K.T.BOSCO SMT.DHANYA P.ASHOKAN (SR.)
SMT.P.DARLY JOHN GP-RIYAL DEVASSY THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 03.06.2025, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 3rd day of June, 2025 Petitioners have approached this Court challenging Ext.P5 decision of the 1st respondent Panchayat, wherein it was decided that no further action need to be taken on the complaint submitted by the petitioners on the allegation that the respondents 5 and 6 have encroached upon the Panchayat property and constructed a compound wall over the retaining wall constructed by the Panchayat.
2. It is averred in the writ petition that petitioners are residents of Chettichal desom and were using a public road namely Chettichal-Mariyamman Kovil road which is approximately six metres wide and has a length of 1.5 kms. It is further contended that with an object to give support to the road margin and to avoid base soil erosion, the 1st respondent constructed a retaining wall on the either side of the said road and the road lies above the level of the adjacent property, and the retaining walls were constructed within the property of the Panchayat. Respondents 5 and 6 who are owners of the properties lying adjacent to the said road have encroached upon the Panchayat property and constructed a compound wall over the retaining wall constructed by the Panchayat. Complaints were preferred before the Panchayat and ultimately the Panchayat committee took a decision not to proceed further with the complaint based on Ext.P4 report of the Assistant Engineer. It is aggrieved by the same that the present writ petition has been filed. The contention of the petitioner is that no person has authority to encroach upon the property of the Panchayat and construct a compound wall over the road margin that too over the retaining wall. Petitioner relying on the defenition of public road in Section 2 (20) of the Kerala Panchayath Raj Act submits that no person shall build any wall or erect any fence or other obstruction or projection or make any encroachment whatsoever whether permanent or temporary in or over any public road.
3. A detailed counter afÏdavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent, wherein it is stated that Ext.P1 complaint was received by the respondents and it was forwarded to the 3rd respondent for conducting an enquiry and submitting a report. Ext.P4 report was submitted which reveals that the width of the road is only four metres as per the records, and on inspection it was found that the road is having 4.9 to 5 metres width, and further it is stated that there is no obstruction to the trafÏc in that locality. It is also reported that 5th and 6th respondents are granted permission by the then janakeeya committee to construct the compound wall over the retaining wal
