P.L. JOHNSON, S/O. LAZAR versus DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR

High Court of Kerala

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

---

P.L. JOHNSON, S/O. LAZAR v. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR - WP(C) No. 22169 of 2007(S) [2007] RD-KL 14065 (25 July 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WP(C) No. 22169 of 2007(S)

1. P.L. JOHNSON, S/O. LAZAR,
... Petitioner

Vs

1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, THRISSUR.
... Respondent

2. TAHSILDAR,

3. ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER,

4. VILLAGE OFFICER,

5. MOHANAN,

6. JOSE, S/O. JACOB,

7. FRANCIS, S/O. DEVASSY,

8. ANNIE, W/O. JOSE,

9. FRANCIS, S/O. INASU,

For Petitioner :SRI.SHOBY K.FRANCIS

For Respondent : No Appearance

The Hon'ble the Chief Justice MR.H.L.DATTU The Hon'ble MR. Justice K.T.SANKARAN

Dated :25/07/2007

O R D E R

H.L. DATTU, C.J. & K.T. SANKARAN, J.

................................................................................... W.P.(C) No. 22169 OF 2007 ...................................................................................

Dated this the 25th July, 2007

J U D G M E N T

H.L. Dattu, C.J.: The petitioner claims that he is a public spirited citizen. In this petition, filed under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, the petitioner seeks the following reliefs:

"i) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to evict all encroachers from the side of P.W.D. Road lying through Velur Village and Velur Panchayath territorial limit on the basis of Exhibit P1 representation; ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the 1st respondent to consider and pass orders on Exhibits P1 and P5 representations forthwith and take action on the same; iii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing the respondents 1 to 4 to remove all encroachments from the P.W.D. Road starting from Velur Panchayath boundary to Choondal and Kaiparamba Panchayath boundaries including Velur-Vellattanjoor Road, Velur-Kilaloor-Mundur Road, Velur-Chunkam Irrigation Canal to Velur Co-operative Society Roads under Kerala Land Conservancy Act & Rules. iv) Issue such other reliefs this Honourable Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case."

2. In our opinion, the assertions and allegations made in this Writ Petition are not in the nature of a Public Interested Litigation. Further, the petitioner cannot claim that he has a locus standi to approach this Court for  W.P.(C) No. 22169 OF 2007 2 the reliefs sought for in this Writ Petition. Therefore, the Writ Petition requires to be rejected and it is rejected.

3. However, liberty is reserved to the petitioner, if he so desires, to go before a civil court for appropriate reliefs. Ordered accordingly. H.L. DATTU, CHIEF JUSTICE. K.T. SANKARAN,

JUDGE.

lk 

Reproduced in accordance with s52(q) of the Copyright Act 1957 (India) from judis.nic.in, indiacode.nic.in and other Indian High Court Websites

dwi Attorney | dui attorney | dwi | dui | austin attorney | san diego attorney | houston attorney | california attorney | washington attorney | minnesota attorney | dallas attorney | alaska attorney | los angeles attorney | dwi | dui | colorado attorney | new york attorney | new jersey attorney | san francisco attorney | seattle attorney | florida attorney | attorney | london lawyer | lawyer michigan | law firm |

Tip:
Double Click on any word for its dictionary meaning or to get reference material on it.