Plea Filed In Kerala High Court Against Water Authority Alleging Trespass, Erection Of Hoarding On Private Property

Navya Benny

20 March 2023 5:54 AM GMT

  • Plea Filed In Kerala High Court Against Water Authority Alleging Trespass, Erection Of Hoarding On Private Property

    The Kerala High Court has sought response of the local authority on the plea of a Kochi resident accusing the Water Authority of trespassing on his private property and putting up hoardings thereon.Justice Shaji P. Chaly directed the Tahsildar of Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam to file the report within three weeks.The 53 years old petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of 8.1 Ares...

    The Kerala High Court has sought response of the local authority on the plea of a Kochi resident accusing the Water Authority of trespassing on his private property and putting up hoardings thereon.

    Justice Shaji P. Chaly directed the Tahsildar of Kanayannur Taluk in Ernakulam to file the report within three weeks.

    The 53 years old petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of 8.1 Ares of property in Poonithura Village, having absolute right and ownership over the land. It is alleged that the Executive Engineer of the Kerala Water Authority (6th respondent) placed a notice board on his land stating that the it belonged to the Authority.

    It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that the Water Authority had illegally trespassed into his property and placed the board and also demolished a boundary wall. It is averred that the property was purchased by the petitioner in the year 1993, and that even at present, land tax was being accepted from the petitioner. The counsels argued that the action of the Water Authority was thus arbitrary, illegal, and against the law, and that the board had to be removed forthwith. 

    The counsels for the petitioner submitted though land upto 1.099 hectares was acquired in Poonithura for the purposes of a Sewage Treatment plant at Vyttila, however, petitioner's property was not acquired. It was submitted that while the petitioner's predecessor had 16.2 ares (40 cents of land), the petitioner had purchased only 20 cents, which property had not been acquired. The petitioner thus challenges how a board could thus be placed in any property which had not been acquired, and without any authority. 

    Advocates Praveen K. Joy, E.S. Saneej, T.A. Joy, M.P. Unnikrishnan, N. Abhilash, Deepu Rajagopal, and Albin Varghese appeared on behalf of the petitioner. 

    Case Title: Johny George v. The District Collector, Ernakulam & Ors. 

    Click Here To Read/Download The Order

    Next Story