THYKANDY RAJAN Vs. DISTRICT DISASTER MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Above writ petition is filed challenging Ext.P5 order of the 1st respondent.

(2.) Brief facts necessary for the disposal of the writ petition are as follows:-

(3.) Petitioner submits that after the purchase of property in the year 2011, the property was levelled to that of the road level, and the petitioner reconstructed the house. Due to some illegal construction activities undertaken in the property of the 2nd and 3rd respondents, rainwater started to flow from the said property into the petitioner's property. Thereupon, Ext.P1 complaint was preferred before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Thaliparamba. As no action was taken on the said complaint, the petitioner has filed a suit before the Munsiff Court, Thalassery, as OS No.157/2020 to remove the illegal construction made by the 2nd respondent. A commission was taken out, and Ext.P3 report was filed, in which it is reported that the property of the 2nd respondent is situated above 10 feet high and that a water channel can be seen, through which water is flowing from the property of the 2nd respondent to the petitioner's property. While so, a complaint was preferred by the 2nd respondent before the 1st respondent, the District Disaster Management Authority represented by its Chairman and District Collector, Kannur, before whom the petitioner appeared and submitted Ext.P4 affidavit. In Ext.P4 affidavit, the pendency of the civil case before the Munsiff Court, Thalassery, regarding the very same subject matter was brought to the notice of the 1st respondent. But the 1st respondent, without considering any of the contentions of the petitioner, passed an order under Sec. 33 of the Disaster Management Act, 2005 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Act, 2005') directing the petitioner to construct a safety wall and also directed the Engineering Sec. attached to the Kannur Municipal Corporation to monitor the work. It is aggrieved by the same that the present writ petition has been filed.