The petitioner challenges Ext.P13 in so far as the District Collector has issued direction to the Circle Inspector of Police, Fort, Thiruvananthapuram Police Station to remove the staircase constructed by the petitioner which according to him is in his property. Further direction has been issued to the Circle Inspector to get the assistance of Taluk Surveyor if necessary. 2. The facts involved in the above case would disclose that the petitioner claims to be the owner in possession of an extent of 2 cents of land. According to the petitioner an extent of 2 cents of puramboke land is lying adjacent to it. The 5th respondent has ownership only in respect of 1 cent of land. According to the petitioner, the 5th respondent has removed the survey stone which was situated in his boundary. He therefore submitted an application for measurement of his property. The Taluk Surveyor on measurement found that the petitioner has only possession in respect of 1.47 cents of land. The said report of the Taluk Surveyor is challenged by the petitioner by filing Ext.P10 appeal which is still pending. In the meantime the 5th respondent had approached the District Collector complaining about a staircase constructed by the petitioner. According to the petitioner, the said staircase is constructed in his property and therefore the District Collector has no reason to interfere with the situation of the said staircase and should not have called upon the Circle Inspector to remove the said staircase.
3. Counter affidavit is filed by the 5th respondent inter alia stating that the petitioner had constructed a staircase in such a manner that it protrudes to the 5th respondent's residential compound and the sole intention of the petitioner is to harras the 5th respondent who is a senior citizen and is aged 83 years. He is residing there only with his wife who is also old and the only intention of the petitioner is to create as much nuisance as possible. According to the 5th respondent, they are in possession of an extent of 5 cents of land in which he got absolute right and ownership and the allegation regarding the puramboke land is absolutely baseless.
4. Having regard to this factual situation, the short question to be considered is whether there is any justification on the part of the District Collector, to have issued the impugned order in terms of Ext.P13.
5. No doubt, if there is a dispute regarding the measurement of the property and whether the stair- case protrudes into the property of the 5th respondent, it is a matter to be considered by the Taluk Surveyor after conducting proper measurement. Though the measurement is already conducted by the Taluk Surveyor, the boundary of the petitioner's property had not been fixed so far and that apart, he had already filed an appeal as Ext.P10 which is pending for consideration.
6. Hence I am of the view that the following orders can be passed:-
(i) The District Superintendent of Survey shall consider and pass appropriate orders in Ext.P10 appeal within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
(ii) Subject to the finality of the said decision, the District Collector shall re-consider the complaint with reference to which Ext.P13 order has been passed and after fixing the boundaries of the petitioner's property, necessary fresh orders shall be passed in accordance with procedure prescribed within a period of four weeks from the date of receipt of order in Ext.P10.
(iii) The petitioner shall produce the copy of the order pursuant to Ext.P10 before the District Collector within a period of one week from the date of receipt of copy of the said order.
MJL Sd/-A.M.SHAFFIQUE JUDGE