The issues that arise for consideration in these writ petitions are the same. Therefore, they are considered and disposed of together. 2. The petitioner in W.P.C. No.21404 of 2008 is a co-owner of an extent of 1 Acre of land in Survey No.1650 of Agaly village. The property originally belonged to the petitioner's father and has devolved on him as well as the other legal representatives, on the death of their father. There is a jeep road having 10 feet width through the property. The road connects Thomamukku and Dundoor. The Agaly Grama Panchayath started implementing a proposal for widening the road to a width of 8 metres. For the purpose, the property owners on both sides of the road had executed consent letters. The petitioner did not give his consent. He filed this writ petition apprehending that the road would be widened utilising his property also, by force. Therefore, he has sought for the issue of appropriate directions restraining the respondents from constructing the road through his property without his consent. This writ petition was admitted on 16.07.2008 and an interim order was granted directing the respondents not to construct any road through the petitioner's property otherwise than by initiating land acquisition proceedings or after obtaining his consent. The said interim order is in force.
3. The petitioner in W.P.C. No.28151 of 2013 is the convener of the beneficiary committee that is engaged in the work of executing the work of widening the road. For the purpose of completing the work expeditiously, the petitioner has brought to the site, the necessary construction materials. The Panchayat is in possession of sufficient funds for completion of the construction work of widening the road. However, the work could not be carried on or completed because of the interim order of stay granted by this Court. The limited relief sought for by the counsel for the petitioner is a permission to complete the widening of those portions of the road with respect to which, proper consent has been executed by the land owners. Unless the work is completed expeditiously, it is contended that the materials collected at site would be lost and that the funds of the Municipality would also get lapsed.
4. Adv. T.C. Suresh Menon appears for the Panchayat. According to the counsel, no portion of the land of the petitioner in W.P.C. No.21404 of 2008 would be utilised for completing the widening work of the road. However, the widening work of the rest of the road is necessary to be completed without further delay. The completion of the work would be of great benefit to the members of the public also.
5. Government pleader appears for the District Collector, Palakkad.
6. In view of the above submissions, it is sufficient that the writ petitions are disposed of permitting the petitioners as well as the panchayat to complete the work of widening the road, excluding the portion that passes through the property of the petitioner in W.P.C. No.21404 of 2008.
7. In view of the above, these writ petitions are disposed of, permitting the petitioner in W.P.C. No.28151 of 2013 as well as the Agaly Grama Panchayat to complete the work of widening the Thamamukku- Dundoor road except the portion that passes through the property of the petitioner in W.P.C. No.21404 of 2008. The interim order granted in W.P.C. No.21404 of 2008 shall continue to be in force until the petitioner in the said writ petition executes a proper consent relinquishing his property for the purpose of widening the road or until land acquisition proceedings are initiated for the purpose of acquiring the necessary extent of property for the purpose of widening the road. The counsel for the Panchayat assures that the work shall be completed expeditiously by utilising the funds that are already available for the purpose.
Sd/-
K. SURENDRA MOHAN JUDGE / True Copy/ NS P.A. To Judge