Property rights require consent for construction by local authorities, and pending representation must be considered promptly by the responsible party.

JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

“a) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing the respondents 1 and 2 not to construct or concrete the alleged Marakkulath Paadam Vaduthala Road through the property of the petitioner comprised in Survey Nos. 137/1, 137/1-14 and 133/2-1 of Ozhur Village without acquiring the property in accordance with law and without the consent of the petitioner.

b) Issue a Writ of Mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction directing 2nd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P5 representation, within a time stipulated by this Hon’ble Court.

c) Pass an order dispensing with the production of English translation of vernacular document at the time of filing of Writ Petition. And d) Pass any other appropriate writ, order or direction which this Hon’ble Court may deem fit to issue and the petitioner may pray from time to time.” [SIC]

2. The petitioner and the 3^rd respondent are the owners and in possession of property comprised in Survey Nos.137/1, 137/1-14 and 133/2-1 of Ozhur Village is the submission. According to the petitioner, the 1^st respondent Panchayat is proposing to construct a concrete road through the said property without the consent of the petitioner. The petitioner submitted an application seeking information as to whether the said road exists in the Panchayat records and whether consent has been obtained from the respective property owners including the petitioner. In response, the 2^nd respondent informed the petitioner that no such road exists in the Panchayat register is the further submission. Now, the respondents 1 and 2 have initiated steps to concrete the said road is the submission. The petitioner submitted a representation before the 2^nd respondent, but the same is also not considered is the grievance. Hence, this writ petition is filed.

3. Heard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner. The manner in which this writ petition is going to be disposed of, no notice is necessary to the respondents. If the respondents are aggrieved by any of the directions issued by this Court, the respondents are free to file a review petition before this Court.

4. Since Ext.P5 is pending before the 2^nd respondent, there can be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to consider the same and till then, status quo can be ordered as far as the road in dispute is concerned.

Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with the following directions:

1. The 2^nd respondent is directed to consider Ext.P5 and pass appropriate orders in it, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 3^rd respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

2. Till final orders are passed in Ext.P5, status quo as on today shall be maintained as far as the road in dispute is concerned. Sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JUDGE nvj