SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 6453

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
VIJU ABRAHAM, J
INASU – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR THRISSUR DISTRICT – Respondent


Advocates:
For the Appellants/Petitioners: K.I.SAGEER
For the Respondents: SANJAY P.PODUVAL

JUDGMENT

Petitioner has approached this Court challenging Ext.P4 notice whereby proceedings under the Land Conservancy Rules, 1958 was initiated invoking urgency clause.

2. Petitionersubmits that he was issued with a building permit for construction of a commercial building and while the construction of the building was going on, the panchayat issued Ext.P2 stop memo stating that the construction is encroaching PWD road and they are awaiting report of the 4th respondent. Thereupon petitioner approached this Court by filing W.P.(C) No.14438 of 2016, which was disposed of by Ext.P3 judgment with a direction to respondents 3 to 6 therein to take expeditious steps to survey the boundary of the PWD road immediately and thereafter take a decision in the matter. The specific grievance raised by the petitioner is that without even complying with the direction in Ext.P3, now Ext.P4 notice has been issued as per the Land Conservancy Rules, 1958 directing the petitioner to evict the encroachment. The respondent panchayat has filed a counter affidavit stating that necessary survey has been conducted, but the specific case of the petitioner is that he has not issued any notice regarding the surv

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top