Over 2 lakh Indian cases. Search powered by Google!

Case Details

THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER versus REMADEVI PATHIYIL

High Court of Kerala

Case Law Search

Indian Supreme Court Cases / Judgements / Legislation

Judgement


THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER v. REMADEVI PATHIYIL - WA No. 1304 of 2007 [2007] RD-KL 9811 (7 June 2007)

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

WA No. 1304 of 2007()

1. THE DIVISIONAL FOREST OFFICER,
... Petitioner

2. THE CHIEF CONSERVATRO OF FORESTS

Vs

1. REMADEVI PATHIYIL,
... Respondent

2. K.P.UNNEERANKUTTY,

For Petitioner :GOVERNMENT PLEADER

For Respondent :SRI.ASHOK.M.CHERIAN

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

Dated :07/06/2007

O R D E R

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

W.A. NO. 1304 OF 2007

Dated this the 7th June, 2007



JUDGMENT

H.L.DATTU, C.J. This appeal is directed against the order passed by the learned single Judge in W.P.(C) No.5976 of 2007 dated 4th April, 2007.

2. The facts in nuts are: Petitioners are owners of property in Sy.Nos.5/2 and 5/1 of Nilambur Village which forms part of a large extent which lies between the Kuthirappuzha and the reserved forest at Nilambur in Malappuram District. In the writ petition filed, the petitioners had pleaded that the only access to their land from the Manjeri-Nilambur road is through a ghat road of about 300 metres through the forest. That allegation of the petitioners was disputed by the respondents - forest officials.

3. The petitioners had also stated in the writ petition that for the purpose of cultivation of the land, they have to carry agricultural accessories, manure etc. and if they are prevented from reaching their W.A.NO.1304 OF 2007 land through the ghat road, their agricultural activities could be affected.

4. The learned Judge, taking into consideration the judgment passed in W.P.(C) No.22781 of 2006 dated 16th November 2006 by a Division Bench of this Court, has permitted the petitioners to make use of the ghat road for their agricultural activities till the respondents construct a new road. Aggrieved by the orders and directions issued by this Court, respondents in the writ petition have filed this appeal.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the appellants would submit that the appellants are making all efforts to file a review petition to review the orders passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.22781 of 2006 dated 16th November, 2006.

6. Learned single Judge is of the opinion that if one person is already permitted to make use of the ghat road to enter into his land, the same treatment requires to be given to the other person who is also having land in Manjeri-Nilambur road. Learned single Judge has applied the principles of Article 14 of the Constitution to give W.A.NO.1304 OF 2007 relief to the petitioners. In view of the above, we do not see any error in the order passed by the learned single Judge.

6. We make it clear that if the appellants succeed in the review petition that may be filed in W.P.(C) No.22781 of 2006, that order would also bind by the respondents in this appeal. Ordered accordingly. (H.L.DATTU) Chief Justice (K.T.SANKARAN) Judge ahz/


Copyright

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

Advertisement

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.