T S RAMACHANDRAN Vs. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PETITIONER wants to construct a residential building for which he obtained Ext.P13 permission from the Revenue Divisional Order. When the petitioner undertook the work in pursuance of Ext.P13, there was a dispute about the manner in which Ext.P13 is complied with. The party respondents herein, ie. respondents 4 and 5 along with another came to this Court with W.P(c) No.31016 of 2009 complaining that Ext.P13 is not being strictly complied with. The learned Single Judge by Ext.P17 judgment considered all the contentions and ultimately issued the following direction which is incorporated in para.10 of Ext.P17. We extract the same below:

(2.) THE petitioner's grievance is that even after Ext.P17 is passed, the petitioner is not being permitted to carry out the work in pursuance of Ext.P13.

(3.) WE are, in these circumstances, satisfied that police protection can be ordered to the petitioner to implement Ext.P13 in strict compliance with the directions in Ext.P13 as ordered in Ext.P17. The learned counsel for the contesting respondents submits that the Revenue Divisional Officer may be directed to ensure that the petitioner removes earth strictly in accordance with terms of Ext.P13 to which reference has been made in para.8 of Ext.P17. WE have no reason to assume that the Revenue Divisional Officer, Adoor, will not comply with the specific directions in Ext.P17.