LCI Learning
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

Kerala Hc Directs Collector To Take Steps For Expeditious Handover Of Houses To 36 Families In Kasargod District

Sanskriti Tiwari ,
  29 September 2023       Share Bookmark

Court :
High Court of Kerala
Brief :

Citation :
W.P. (C) No. 2887 of 2021

CASE TITLE:

Sri Inbasekar K vs. State of Kerala

DATE OF ORDER:

25th September, 2023

BENCH:

Justice Devan Ramachandran

PARTIES:-

Petitioner: Sri Inabsekar K, IAS, District Collector, Kasargod

Defendant: State Government of Kerala

SUBJECT:-

The Kerala High Court’s (hereinafter referred to as the court) determination to expedite the process of providing 36 families with houses, emphasizing the families’ suffering, the need for swift action, and a directive for the district collector to ensure the completion of necessary work on the houses.

IMPORTANT PROVISIONS:-

  • The Constitution of India:-
  • Article 21:-

Protection of Life and Personal Liberty: No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

 

  • Article 226:-

Power of High Courts to issue certain writs.

(1) Notwithstanding anything in article 32, every High Court shall have power, throughout the territories in relation to which it exercises jurisdiction, to issue to any person or authority, including in appropriate cases, any Government, within those territories directions, orders or writs, including writs in the nature of habeas corpus, mandamus, prohibition, quo warranto and certiorari, or any of them, for the enforcement of any of the rights conferred by Part III and for any other purpose.

(2) The power conferred by clause (1) to issue directions, orders or writs to any Government, authority or person may also be exercised by any High Court exercising jurisdiction in relation to the territories within which the cause of action, wholly or in part, arises for the exercise of such power, notwithstanding that the seat of such Government or authority or the residence of such person is not within those territories.

(3) Where any party against whom an interim order, whether by way of injunction or stay or in any other manner, is made on, or in any proceedings relating to, a petition under clause (1), without-

(a) furnishing to such party copies of such petition and all documents in support of the plea for such interim order; and

(b) giving such party an opportunity of being heard, makes an application to the High Court for the vacation of such order and
furnishes a copy of such application to the party in whose favour such order has been made or the counsel of such party, the High Court shall dispose of the application within a period of two weeks from the date on which it is received or from the date on which the copy of such application is so furnished, whichever is later, or where the High Court is closed on the last day of that period, before the expiry of the next day afterwards on which the High Court is open; and if the application is not so disposed of, the interim order shall, on the expiry of that period, or, as the case may be, the expiry of the said next day, stand vacated.

(4) The power conferred on a High Court by this article shall not be in derogation of the power conferred on the Supreme Court by clause (2) of article 32.

 

OVERVIEW:-

The case pertains to the need for housing solutions for 36 families in the Kasargod District, who have faced prolonged sufferings due to delays in the utilization of constructed houses. The writ petition has been pending before the court from three years. The primary parties involved in this case are the District Collector, the Government, represented by the Government Pleader and the petitioner, represented by a legal counsel.

ISSUES RAISED:-

 

  1. The significant delays in providing housing to the 36 families in Kasargod District.
  2. The responsibility for funding and completing of the maintenance work.
  3. The role of court in resolving such issues.

 

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE PETITIONER:-

  1. The learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Sanand Ramakrishnan argued that, “since his client has expended a large amount of money for the construction of 36 houses, they are willing to repair them, subject to fiancés being available with them”.
  2. He further raised his contention that, “the matters have come to this stage today, only because of delay and since the houses have been kept unused for the last several years”.
  3. He also asserted that, “there are no impediments, legal or otherwise, in handing over the houses to the beneficiaries and that all which now remains are certain maintenance works over the same, for which, he also made available an estimate, prepared by the Public Works Department (PWD)”.

 

ARGUMENTS ADVANCED BY THE RESPONDENTS:-

The learned pleader of the respondents, Sri Sunil Kumar Kuriakose affirmed that, “If the houses are repaired and maintained, it can be handed over to the 36 beneficiaries without delay”.

Secondly, he contended that, “As is also available in the report of the District Collector, the petitioner themselves have come forward in altruism to expend the amounts required and that if they find any difficulty, they can discuss the same to the District Collector, who then can take necessary actions”.

ANALYSIS:-

The court, considering the willingness of the petitioner to undertake necessary repairs and analyzing the need to provide housing to the 36 families gave the following orders:-

  1. The District Collector and the petitioner must meet on 27th September at 11:00 a.m., in order to complete the maintenance work on the houses promptly.
  2. The work must be finalized till 15th October, 2023 so that the families could move in safe and comfortable homes.
  3. The District Collector has to report the progress to the court. He is also directed to appear physically on the next hearing, which is scheduled on 4th of the following month, to ensure his compliance with this directive.

 

 

CONCLUSION:-

The order of the court demonstrates a strong commitment in addressing the urgent housing needs of the 36 families in Kasargod district. The court acknowledges the suffering of these families and the importance of providing the safe and comfortable homes to them. Thus, this decision of the court reflects a proactive approach in resolving a pressing social issue through legal means, while emphasising the importance of collaboration and accountability among the involved parties. It places the well-being of the affected families at the forefront. Thus, it emphasizes the importance of timely and compassionate action in resolving a humanitarian crisis in a very efficient way.

 

 
"Loved reading this piece by Sanskriti Tiwari?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"



Published in Others
Views : 472




Comments