BABY LIKHITHA Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER submits that on the southern extremity of her property, there was a temporary compound wall, which was being repaired on a periodical basis. It is stated that, in the place of the temporary compound wall, the Petitioner wanted to construct a pucca compound wall and that soon after the work commenced, Ext.P1 stop memo was issued directing the Petitioner not to continue the work. According to the Petitioner, thereupon she submitted Exts.P2 and P3 representations to the District Collector objecting to Ext.P1.

(2.) IT is also her case that against the persons at whose instance Ext.P1 stop memo was issued, Petitioner filed OS 67/2010 before the Munsiff Court, Punalur, the plaint of which is Ext.P4 and has obtained an order of injunction. It is stated that, in the meanwhile, the District Collector has issued Ext.P6 order concluding that the Petitioner has trespassed into the thodu puramboke and unauthorisedly constructed the compound wall. Ext.P6 further says that instructions have been issued to the Additional Tahsildar to initiate proceedings against the Petitioner under the Kerala Land Conservancy Act. It is challenging Ext.P6, the writ petition is filed. It is the case of the Petitioner that she has not trespassed into any puramboke property and that the proceedings evidenced by Ext.P6 is illegal and unauthorised.

(3.) THEREFORE , clarifying that pursuant to Ext.P6, if the Tahsildar initiates any action, it will be open to the Petitioner to file her objections and that the Tahsildar will thereupon decide the matter in accordance with law, the writ petition is disposed of.