Vijayalakshmi Channatti And Anr vs Vishwas Mehta And Ors

The above contempt of court case has been filed alleging non compliance of the directions and orders passed by this Court in Annexure- A1

judgment dated 19.6.2020 in W.P.(C.) No.12061/2020 filed by the petitioners herein.

Heard Smt.P.V.Sobhana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners and Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned senior Government Pleader appearing

for respondents 2, 5 and 6 in the above contempt of court case. Respondents 1, 3 and 4 have already been ordered to be struck out and deleted from

the respondent array in the contempt case. Now, it is submitted by Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned senior Government Pleader on the basis of

instructions that the present contempt of court case is limited only to the extent that the directions as against the respondent RDO-Chengannur have

not been complied with. Further, it is pointed out that RDO-Chengannur has not been impleaded in the W.P.(C.) or initially in the contempt of court

case. The petitioners have committed a serious mistake in impleading R3 in the W.P.(C.) as the Revenue Divisional Officer, Alappuzha whereas in

fact the subject property would fall within the territorial limits not of the RDO â€" Alappuzha, but that of the RDO- Chengannur.

Further that, without standing on any such technicalities, the revenue authorities concerned have understood the spirit of the judgment on the

premise that the directions in the above judgment in the W.P.(C.) are actually to be complied with by RDO â€" Chengannur. Further, the senior

Government Pleader would submit on the basis of instructions that RDO- Chengannur has caused to conduct an inspection with notice to the parties

concerned and thereafter has now issued proceedings dated 12.12.2020, wherein it has been found that there is serious water logging issue in the

subject property, which is seen included in the asset register of Chingoli Grama Panchayat (R4 in Annexure-A1 W.P.(C.) No.12016/2020) and

consequently, RDO-Chengannur has directed the Chingoli Grama Panchayat authorities to ensure the construction of a drainage to ensure the

avoidance of water logging problems. Further, that the Panchayat authorities have also apprised the RDO-Chengannur during the course of hearing

that the road in question will be constructed by the Panchayat only after the construction of the drainage to avoid water logging issues as directed by

the RDO concerned. Further that, the RDO has also ordered that the petitioners herein will be at liberty to file application for survey and

measurement, in case they have any boundary disputes and that the petitioners have been given liberty to approach the Tahsildar by filing the requisite

application in terms of the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act and the Rules framed thereunder. Further that, the RDO has also issued directions to

the Tahsildar concerned to consider and act upon the said application for survey and measurement, if so filed by the petitioners herein.

Smt. P.V.Sobhana, learned counsel appearing for the petitioners would point out that copy of the abovesaid proceedings dated 12.12.2020 said to

have been issued by the RDO-Chengannur has not so far been furnished to the petitioners. Further that, the subject property, where the Panchayat is

now attempting to construct a road is the private property within the valid title and possession of the petitioners etc.

The latter submission made by the petitioners regarding claim for title and possession of the subject property etc. is not a matter, which would come

within the concern of this Court and that of particularly in contempt of court proceedings. RDO has already ordered that if the petitioners have any

boundary issues, they can approach the Tahsidar or the Taluk Surveyor concerned by filing requisite application under the Kerala Survey and

Boundaries Act, 1961 and the Rules framed thereunder. Needless to say that in case petitioners have any dispute regarding title, possession or any

other issues, it is for them to agitate and work out their remedies in the manner known to law. For that purpose, such pleas cannot be entertained in

contempt proceedings. The abovesaid submission made on behalf of the Addl. 5th respondent, RDO-Chegannur will ensure that copy of the

aforementioned inspection report as well as copy of the abovesaid proceedings dated 12.12.2020 issued by him shall be immediately forwarded by

registered post with acknowledgment due to the 1st petitioner. Further, it is also ordered that RDO-Chengannur will ensure that copy of the said

inspection report as well as that of the proceedings dated 12.12.2020 is immediately forwarded to the Sri.Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned senior

Government Pleader by email attachment/whatsapp attachment, who in turn will ensure that the same are duly forwarded to Smt.P.V.Sobhana,

learned counsel appearing for the petitioners.

Recording the abovesaid submissions on behalf of the respondents and with the said liberty, the above contempt of court case will stand disposed of.