Kerala High Court
WP(C)/42104/2017 of SIDHIK Vs THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR on 29 December 2017
COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939 WP(C).No. 42104 of 2017 (K) ---------------------------- PETITIONER(S): ------------------------ 1. SIDHIK, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.SHAMSUDHEEN, NEDUMTHARAYIL
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 29TH DAY OF DECEMBER 2017/8TH POUSHA, 1939
WP(C).No. 42104 of 2017 (K)
----------------------------
PETITIONER(S):
------------------------
1. SIDHIK, AGED 42 YEARS, S/O.SHAMSUDHEEN, NEDUMTHARAYIL PUTHEN VEEDU, KIDANGAYAM, NORTH PATHARAM, SHOORANAD SOUTH, PATHARAM.P.O, KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 522.
2. SUDHEER.S.,
NEDUMTHARAYIL, KIDANGAYAM NORTH, SOUTH SHOORANAD, PATHARAM.P.O., KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 522.
BY ADV. SRI.ESM.KABEER
RESPONDENT(S):
-----------------------------
1. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
CIVIL STATION, KOLLAM-691 013
2. THE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
KOTTARAKKARA-691 506
3. THE TAHSILDAR,
TALUK OFFICE, KUNNATHOOR, SASTHAMKOTTA,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 521
4. MUHAMMED SHAHAN,
SAYED ABUTHAHIR VALIYULLA CHARITABLE
TRUST AND KADHIRIYYA TRUST & KADHIRIYYA MAJLIS
PATHARAM.P.O., SHOORANADU VILLAGE,
KOLLAM DISTRICT-690 522.
R1 TO R3 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. A.C.VIDHYA
sts
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 29-12-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No. 42104 of 2017 (K)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
P1COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION ISSUED BY THE SECRETARY SHOORANADU SOUTH GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 21/02/2016.SOUTH GRAMA PANCHAYAT DATED 21/02/2016.
P2COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM DATED 27/09/2014.REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOLLAM DATED 27/09/2014.
P3COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED09/10/201409/10/2014
P4COPY OF THE APPLICATION UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT DATED01/02/201601/02/2016
P5COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 25/02/2015 OF THE WAKF INSPECTOR.
P6COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24/09/2017
RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:
NIL
/TRUE COPY/
P.A.TO JUDGE
Devan Ramachandran, J.
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
W.P.(C) No.42104 of 2017
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Dated this the 29[th] day of December, 2017
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
JUDGMENT
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
The petitioners have preferred Ext.P6 representationbefore the 1[st] respondent District Collector, Kollam allegingseveral nefarious and dangerous activities on the side ofthe 4[th] respondent.
2. I do not propose to go deep into the merits of thiswrit petition and in view of the directions that I propose inthis judgment, I deem it not necessary to issue notice to the4[th] respondent either.
3. Since the petitioner has already filed Ext.P6before the 1[st] respondent District Collector, I am of theview that the said authority is enjoined in law to considerthe same especially taking note of the highly dangerousactivities alleged against the 4[th] respondent. I am not saying that the allegations are true. But I am only sayingthat the 1[st] respondent District Collector has a duty toinvestigate into the same and to find out its truth. Whiledoing so, of course, the District Collector is obligated in lawto issue a notice to the 4[th] respondent as also to hear himand only thereafter to take a decision on the representation.
4. In such circumstances, I order this writ petitiondirecting the 1[st] respondent District Collector, Kollam totake up Ext.P6 representation made before him by thepetitioner and to issue notice to the 4[th] respondent andafford him an opportunity of being heard and thereafter todispose of the said representation by an appropriate orderin terms of law. I clarify that nothing contained in thejudgment shall be used by any of the parties to take theposition that this Court has in any manner spoken in favouror against any of the parties to this writ petition. Theexercise as directed in this writ petition shall be completedby the 1[st] respondent as expeditiously as possible, but not W.P(C).42104/17 :3:
later than two months form the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is thus ordered.
Sd/-
Devan Ramachandran,Judge
okb