SREEDHARAN Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Appellant / the Original Petitioner had challenged the judgment dtd. 28/5/2012 delivered by the learned Single Judge of this Court dismissing W.P.(C) No. 6566 of 2007 filed by him. In the writ petition, the Appellant had challenged the order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad, dtd. 17/2/2007, directing the Appellant to provide irrigation facilities to the private Respondents.

(2.) The Appellant is the owner of a property in Re.Sy.No.35/7, Block No.44, Old Sy. No.133/4 in Poipully amsom and desom in Palakkad District. Respondent No.5 is the owner of Re-survey No.33/5 in Poipully amsom and desom, Palakkad Taluk, which is adjoining to the Appellant and is at the higher elevation of the field of the Appellant. There were civil disputes between the Appellant and Respondent No.5. The Respondent No.5 had filed proceedings before the Munsiff 's Court, Palakkad, for mandatory injunction. The First Appeal was dismissed. Thereafter, further civil proceedings took place between the parties regarding the irrigation facilities on agricultural land.

(3.) A petition came to be filed by Respondent No.4 before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad, under the Kerala Land Utilization Order, 1967 (Order of 1967), making a grievance regarding the obstruction in the field irrigation by the Appellant. The Revenue Divisional Officer called the parties for a hearing, that is, the Appellant and the Respondent No.5, on 11/8/2006 and the hearing was conducted on 28/8/2006, 19/9/2006, 17/10/2006, 13/11/2006, 2/12/2006, 11/12/2006, 9/1/2007 and 16/1/2007. The Revenue Divisional Officer visited the site. Both parties presented their statement and counter-statements. Thereafter, the Revenue Divisional Officer perused the pleadings and recorded a finding that the Appellant had obstructed the flow of water from the southern part of the land by creating a bund and directed the Appellant to remove the bund or restore the irrigation facilities, which was stated to be in existence previously. The Appellant was directed to comply with the same within 15 days.