SIVANANDAN S/O VASUDEVAN Vs. DISTRICT COLLECTOR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was aggrieved with Ext.P9 stop memo dated 05.01.2017. The contention of the learned Counsel for the petitioner is that Ext.P9 has been issued totally without jurisdiction and in violation of the permissions and sanctions obtained for the specific work undertaken by the petitioner, of building a bridge across Killi river; joining the cultivable lands of the petitioner lying on the two banks of the said river.

(2.) The petitioner has 54.95 Ares of property; of which 50.80 Ares is in Survey No.451/4, 4.05 Ares in Re-Survey No.451/3-1 and 0.10 Ares in Re-Survey No.451/4-1. The above lands are agricultural lands which are situated on either side of the Killi river, which river is comprised in Survey No.452. A retaining wall was built in the river, which, according to the petitioner, obstructed the free access into his properties on both sides. Further, the petitioner also required free movement between the properties on both sides of the river, and hence, according to the petitioner, a bridge was necessitated; to facilitate a tractor to cross over.

(3.) The petitioner made an application before the District Collector for building a bridge, as is seen from Ext.P1. The Additional Tahsildar filed a report before the District Collector as per Ext.P2. In Ext.P2, it was specifically noticed that on either side of the river there is river Puramboke and the petitioner's properties are lying beyond the puramboke property. It was specifically reported that the petitioner could build a bridge from one side of the river to the other, however, ensuring that there is no encroachment into the puramboke.