ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J. According to the petitioner, he is the owner-in-possession of 4.05 Ares of property, which is predominantly a paddy field. For the purpose of construction of a residential house in the said property, the petitioner made an application before the Local Level Monitoring Committee constituted under the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act. On getting report from the Village Officer and upon the recommendation of the Local Level Monitoring Committee, the District Level Committee resolved to grant permit for reclamation and pursuant to the said resolution, the R.D.O. has issued Ext.P6 order granting permit for doing the reclamation work, which was valid for a period of six months. As the petitioner could not undertake the reclamation work in time, he has made an application for extension of time. The W.P.(C)No.12122 of 2014 2 said request was granted by Ext.P7 and the time was extended till 24/4/2014. When the petitioner started reclamation work, the same was obstructed by the 3rd respondent and his supporters. The petitioner has approached this Court in W.P. (C).No.11713 of 2014 and this Court by Ext.P10 judgment ordered that the petitioner can do reclamation work until 31/5/2014. Now the grievance of the petitioner is that the reclamation being carried out on the strength of the orders of the statutory authority and Ext.P10 judgment is being obstructed by the 3rd respondent and his supporters. Therefore, he is seeking necessary and adequate police protection to carry out the construction without causing obstruction by the third respondent and his supporters.
2. The learned Government Pleader on instructions submitted that on the basis of Ext.P8 complaint made by the petitioner, the first respondent has instructed the 3rd respondent not to cause any obstruction to the reclamation work being carried out in the property on the strength of the orders of the statutory authorities and Ext.P10 judgment.
W.P.(C)No.12122 of 2014 3 According to the learned Government Pleader at present there is no law and order problem. The learned Government Pleader further submitted that as and when there is any threat or obstruction by the 3rd respondent and its supporters, the first respondent is prepared to afford necessary police protection to the petitioner to carry out the reclamation work.
In such circumstances, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the petitioner to move the 1st respondent in case any obstruction is being caused by the 3rd respondent and his supporters. If such a representation is received, the 1st respondent shall grant adequate police protection to the petitioner to carry out the reclamation work on the strength of Exhibits P6 and P7 orders issued by the statutory authorities and Ext.P10 judgment of this Court.
A.V.RAMAKRISHNA PILLAI, JUDGE skj ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE