The court directed timely action by authorities regarding property encroachment and potential hazards, emphasizing the need for due process in resolving such disputes.

J U D G M E N T

Petitioner states that he is the absolute owner in possession of property measuring 2.02 ares comprising a residential building, situated in Re-Survey No.143/31, Kottappadi Village, Wayanad District. The property of the 5^th respondent lies adjacent to the southern boundary of the property of the petitioner and is situated at a lower elevation.

2. During May, 2024, the 5^th respondent illegally excavated soil by encroaching upon the southern portion of the property of the petitioner. The 5^th respondent failed to construct any retaining wall to safeguard the property of the petitioner. As a result, the building situated on the property of the petitioner is under threat of collapsing onto the property of the 5^th respondent.

3. The petitioner preferred Ext.P4 representation before the 4^th respondent seeking intervention in the matter. But, no action was taken by the 4^th respondent. The petitioner then preferred Ext.P6 representation before the 1^st respondent seeking to initiate expedient action in the matter. However, no action was taken by the authorities. The petitioner was thus constrained to prefer Ext.P7 representation before the 1^st respondent seeking urgent action. Due to the inordinate delay on the part of the 1^st respondent in considering the representation submitted by the petitioner, this writ petition has been filed.

4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader representing respondents 1 and 2 and the learned Standing Counsel representing respondents 3 and 4. Notice to the 5^th respondent is dispensed with in view of the nature of the relief to be granted in the writ petition.

5. The grievance of the petitioner is regarding urgent requirement for construction of a retaining wall as imminent disaster is likely. From the pleadings, I find that the petitioner has preferred Exts.P6 and P7 representations before the 1^st respondent.

6. Considering the facts of the case, I am of the view that the 1^st respondent shall look into the grievance of the petitioner and take appropriate decision with notice to both sides.

The writ petition is accordingly disposed of directing the 1^st respondent or the competent authority to consider Exts.P6 and P7 representations and take appropriate decision thereon within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner, the 5^th respondent and the 3^rd respondent, if necessary. The competent authority hearing the matter will be free to conduct an inspection of the site also, if situation so warrants.