AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Kurian Joseph, C.J.—Petitioner is the appellant. He approached this Court aggrieved by the alleged high-headed action on the part of the respondents in constructing a Danga. With reference to the factual position, the learned Single Judge has disposed of the matter. Para 4 of the judgment, reads as follows:
It is the stand of the department that scheme is old and in the year 2006 only some repair work was done with the consent of beneficiaries including the petitioner on old lines. The construction has been completed in December, 2006 and thereafter no construction no construction has been carried out by the department. The petition has been filed on 25.3.2009 after more than two years. The department has taken the stand that construction work was carried out with the consent of the petitioner, which the petitioner is denying. There are disputed facts, which cannot be gone into in the writ petition. The petitioner has alternative remedy with respect to his alleged grievance.
Learned Deputy Advocate General submits that the department has not made any attempt for any further construction at the place and their attempt was only for repairing the defects. The above submission is recorded. The respondents shall not raise any further construction. The L.P.A. is closed without prejudice to the liberty reserved to the petitioner-appellant in the judgment under appeal to approach any forum, including the right to leave for compensation, by way of reference.
The appeal is disposed of, so also the pending application(s), if any. Copy Dasti.