BASHEER K.P v. STATE OF KERALA
Court: High Court of Kerala
Bench: HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
Judgment date:
Case summary
High Court of Kerala judgment dated 2020-05-28. BASHEER K.P v. STATE OF KERALA. Read the judgment and case details on LawSphereX.
Judgment text
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN THURSDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF MAY 2020 / 7TH JYAISHTA, 1942 WP(C). No. 7697 OF 2020(J) PETITIONER :- BASHEER K. P. , AGED 40 YEARS S/O. MAMMAD P. , AMINA MANZIL, ILLAM MOOLA, MATTANNOOR P. O. , SIVAPURAM, KANNUR DISTRICT. BY ADV. SRI. C. M. MOHAMMED IQUABAL RESPONDENTS :- 1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO THE GOVERNMENT, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001. 2 KERALA STATE TRANSPORT PROJECT SREEBALA BUILDING, NANDANCODE, COWDIAR P. O. , THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 003, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR. 3 THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, KSTP DIVISION, KANNUR, KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 012. BY SMT. VINITHA B, GP THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 28. 05. 2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C). No.
7697 OF 2020(J) -: 2 :- JUDGMENT th Dated this the 28 day of May 2020 This writ petition is filed seeking directions to the respondents to take steps to reinstall the cross bars put on the end of the tarred portion of the road leading to the petitioner's rd property. There is a further prayer to the 3 respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext. P3 representation preferred by the petitioner. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been issued with a licence for a crusher unit in his property taking note of the width of the approach road as 7. 5 meters. It is stated that due to the lifting of the level of the State Highway and the re-tarring of the approach road at a reduced width, the width has now been reduced to 5. 5 meters and the petitioner's licence is at jeopardy. The petitioner has submitted rd Ext. P3 representation before the 3 respondent and submits that the widening of the road to its original width of 7.
5 meters is liable to be considered and that the petitioner is even prepared to bear the reasonable expenses incurred for the purpose. 3. The learned Government Pleader submits that there is a level difference between the re-tarred portion of the road and that WP(C). No. 7697 OF 2020(J) -: 3 :-the issue can be resolved if the petitioner is ready to meet the expenses. Having considered the contentions advanced, I am of the opinion that Ext. P3 representation preferred by the petitioner is rd liable to be considered at the earliest by the 3 respondent. The contention of the petitioner that he is prepared to meet the reasonable expenses for the retention of the width of the road can rd also be considered by the 3 respondent. Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and corrective measures shall be taken without delay. The writ petition is ordered accordingly. Sd/- ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE Jvt/28. 5. 2020 WP(C). No.
7697 OF 2020(J) -: 4 :- APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS: EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT ISSUED BY VILAMANA VILLAGE OFFICE DATED 25. 10. 2019. EXHIBIT P2 THE TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE ROAD. EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 1. 2. 2020. //TRUE COPY// P. A. TO JUDGE
Source: High Court of Kerala. Dataset: Dattam Labs. CC BY 4.0. Text extracted automatically; compare with the source PDF for layout and accuracy.