IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
JOHNSON LOUIS LOPEZ – Appellant
Versus
THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER / SUB DIVISIONAL OFFICER – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 41605 OF 2025
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petition seeks removal of hazardous trees. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. counsel discusses necessity for local action. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“i) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction commanding the 1st respondent to take immediate and effective steps on Ext. P5 representation of the petitioner by conducting a due enquiry and taking appropriate action to ensure the removal of the dangerous trees standing in the 4th respondent’s property, which pose a threat to the life and property of the petitioner.
ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing respondents 2 & 3 to take necessary and expeditious action on Exts. P3 and P4 complaints submitted by the petitioner, in accordance with law, to avert danger to the life and property of the petitioner.
iii) To issue a declaration that the inaction on the part of respondent Nos. 1 to 3 in not taking any steps on the complaints and representation submitted by the petitioner is illegal, arbitrary, and violative of Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India.
iv) To grant such other reliefs as this Hon’ble Court may deem just and proper in the interest of justice, including costs.
v) To dispense with English Translation of Malayalam Documents.”[SIC]
2. The petitioner is aggrieved because some trees on the 4th respondent’s property are dangerously leaning toward his property. The petitioner submitted Ext.P5 representation before the 1st respondent, Revenue Divisional Officer. No action is taken, is the submission.
Hence, this Writ Petition is filed.
3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the Panchayat and the learned Government Pleader. 4. After hearing both sides, I think these types of grievances are to be considered by the local Panchayat. Therefore, the petitioner can be allowed to file a representation before the additional 5th respondent and there can be a direction to consider that representation with notice to the petitioner and the 4th respondent within a time frame.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following manner:
1. The petitioner is free to file a representation narrating the grievance raised in this Writ Petition before the additional 5th respondent, within two weeks from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
2. Once such a representation is received, the additional 5th respondent will consider the same, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 4th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of the representation.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.