IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
USHA – Appellant
Versus
DISTRICT COLLECTOR & CHAIRMAN DISTRICT DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY – Respondent
WP(C) NO. 16368 OF 2026
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. petitioner seeks judicial intervention for the removal of dangerous trees. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court directs statutory authority to conclude proceedings with due process. (Para 3) |
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:
“i. To issue a writ of mandamus, such other writ or order or direction to the Respondents No 1 to 4 respondent to take immediate steps to cut and remove the mango tree and coconut tree standing in the 5th respondents property which causing danger to the petitioner’s life and property;
ii. Dispense with the production of translation of vernacular documents iii. Issue any such other writ, direction or orders, which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper considering the facts and circumstances of the case.” [SIC]
2. The grievance of the petitioner is that the trees situated in the property of the 5th respondent is dangerously leaning towards the building of the petitioner and the same is in a dangerous condition. The petitioner approached the statutory authorities to cut and remove the trees. As per Ext.P4, the petitioner was informed by the Panchayat that a notice is issued to the 5th respondent. Even then, there is no further proceedings is the grievance.
Hence, this writ petition is filed.
3. Heard, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, the learned Government Pleader and the learned Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent Panchayat. The manner in which this writ petition is going to be disposed of, no notice is necessary to the 5th respondent. If the 5th respondent is aggrieved by any of the directions issued by this Court, the 5th respondent is free to file a review petition before this Court.
4. Admittedly Ext.P4 proceedings is initiated by the
4th respondent. The Standing Counsel appearing for the 3rd respondent submitted that, when an attempt was made to cut and remove the trees, that was disputed by the petitioner. I don’t want to make any observation about the same. Since, Ext.P4 is already issued, the 3rd respondent can conclude the proceedings, after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 5th respondent.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of in the following directions:
1. The 3rd respondent is directed to conclude the proceedings and do the needful based on Ext.P4 proceedings, after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the petitioner and the 5th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
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.