M/S. PRISTINE ISLE RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED v. Kodamthuruth Grama Panchayat & Others

# **IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM** ## **PRESENT** **THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN** **MONDAY, THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 5TH MAGHA, 1942** ## **WP(C).No.4404 OF 2019(A)** ## **PETITIONER:** **M/S. PRISTINE ISLE RESORTS PRIVATE LIMITED, KOVILAKAM, KADAMTHURUTH, KUTHIYATHODU P. O., CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY ITS MANAGING DIRECTOR MOHAMMED ABDUL KAREEM FAISAL.** **BY ADV. SRI. SAIBY JOSE KIDANGOOR** ## **RESPONDENTS:** - **1 KODAMTHURUTH GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KUTHIYATHODU P. O., CHERTHALA, PIN – 688 533, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.** - **2 THE SECRETARY, KADAMTHURUTH GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KUTHIYATHODU P. O., CHERTHALA, PIN – 688 533.** - **3 THE KERALA COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT AUTHORITY, 4TH FLOOR, KSRTC BUS TERMINAL, THAMPANOOR, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM – 695 001, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHAIRMAN.** - **4 THE CHAIRMAN, THE DISTRICT LEVEL COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE, ALAPPUZHA DISTRICT, (THE DISTRICT MAGISTRATE/DISTRICT COLLECTOR ) COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA – 688 001.** W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **2** - **5 THE DISTRICT TOWN PLANNER, DISTRICT TOWN PLANNING OFFICE, A BLOCK, 3RD FLOOR, ANNEX BOAT JETTY, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 688 001.** - **6 THE CANAL OFFICER, CANAL OFFICE, IRRIGATION SECTION, CHERTHALA, PIN - 688 524.** - **7 ULNADAN MATYATHOZHILALI FEDERATION, PUTHUVAL NIKARTH, VAYALAR P. O., CHERTHALA – 688 536, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY N.R.SHAJI.** - ***ADDL THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER, R8 KUTHIYATHODE POLICE STATION, ALAPPUZHA.** - ***ADDL R8 IN SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 02-08-2019.** - ***ADDL KERALA STATE REMOTE SENSING AND ENVIRONMENT R9 CENTRE (KSRSEC) FIRST FLOOR, VIKAS BHAVAN, NEAR LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY, UNIVERSITY OF KERALA SENATE HOUSE CAMPUS, PMG, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 033, REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR.** ***IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 17-012020.** - ***ADDL THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,** - **R10 COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA, PIN – 688 001.** - ***ADDL THE TAHSILDAR(LR) R11 TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA PIN – 688 524** W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **3** ***ADDL TALUK SURVEYOR R12 TALUK OFFICE, CHERTHALA, PIN - 688 524.** ***ADDL R10, R11 AND R12 ARE SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 25-01-2021 IN WP(C)4404/2019.** **R1 & R2 – SRI. G.BHAGAVAT SINGH R3 – M.P PRAKASH, SC, KCZMA R5 & R8 – SMT. VIDHYA R7 – SRI. R. MURALEEKRISHNAN R7 – SRI. V.S.NOWSHAD R7 – SMT. T.M.RESHMY R9 – SRI. S.VISHNU** **THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:** W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **4** ## **JUDGMENT** The petitioner, a private company registered under the Companies Act, which owns a resort by name 'Emerald Pristine Isle Resort' in Ward No.7 of the 1[st] respondent Kodamthuruth Grama Panchayat, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India seeking a writ of certiorari to quash Ext.P9 report dated 20.03.2017 of the 5[th] respondent District Town Planner addressed to the additional 10[th] respondent District Collector, who is the Chairman of the District Level Coastal Zone Management Committee, Alappuzha, the 4[th] respondent herein; Ext.P10 communication dated 30.03.2017 of the additional 10[th] respondent, addressed to the 2[nd] respondent Secretary of Kodamthuruth Grama Panchayat; and also Ext.P11 stop memo dated 03.12.2018 issued by the 2[nd] respondent. The petitioner has also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding respondents 1 and 2 to grant D&O licence to the petitioner for the period 20182019, for running the resort, on receipt of the application. 2. On 13.02.2019, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Standing Counsel for Coastal Zone W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **5** Management Authority took notice for the 3[rd] respondent. The learned Government Pleader took notice for respondents 4 to 6. Urgent notice by speed post was ordered to respondents 1, 2 and 7, returnable within ten days. 3. On 25.02.2019, respondents 1 and 2 have filed counter affidavit opposing the reliefs sought for in the writ petition, pointing out illegal extensions and reclamations made in the manmade island in Vembanadu lake and also the violation of statutory provisions. On 12.03.2019, the 3[rd] respondent has filed counter affidavit, wherein it is pointed out that, Kodamthuruthu falls in CRZ I category in the approved Coastal Zone Management Plan of 1996 and as such, any constructions in the said area require prior permission from the said respondent. In the counter affidavit, it is also pointed out that, as per Annexure III to CRZ notification, 1991, prior clearance is required to be obtained from the Ministry of Environment and Forests for construction of beach resorts and hotels in the designated areas of CRZ III. On 22.03.2019, the petitioner has filed I.A No.1 of 2019 seeking permission to complete the repair/maintenance work in the resort. Respondents W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **6** 1 and 2 have filed counter affidavits opposing the relief sought for in I.A No.1 of 2019. 4. By the order dated 22.03.2019, the petitioner was directed to file reply affidavit, if any, within a week and the learned Senior Government Pleader was directed to make available for the perusal of this Court the files relating to the permission granted to the petitioner, by the 6[th] respondent Canal Officer, Cherthala. 5. On 03.04.2019, when this writ petition came up for consideration, the 7[th] respondent, Ulnadan Malsya Thozhilali Federation, Vayalar filed a counter affidavit. The learned counsel for the petitioner sought time to file reply affidavit. Having considered the averments in the writ petition, the counter affidavits filed by respondents 1 and 2, that filed by the 3[rd] respondent and that filed by the 7[th] respondent, this Court passed an interim order dated 03.04.2019. Paragraphs 3 to 7 and also the last paragraph of that order read thus; “3.Having perused the averments in the writ petition, the counter affidavits filed by respondents 1 and 2, the 3[rd] respondent and the 7[th] respondent, and also W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **7** the photographs placed on record, this Court finds that despite the issuance of various orders, stop memos, etc. by the 2[nd] respondent, the Secretary of the 1[st] respondent Grama Panchayat, the petitioner has chosen to proceed with the construction activities and repair works, showing scant regard to those orders, stop memos, etc. 4.Going by the counter affidavit filed by the 3[rd] respondent Kerala State Coastal Zone Management Authority, 'Kodamthuruth' falls in CRZ-I category in the approved Coastal Zone Management Plan, 1996 and as such, any constructions in the said area require prior permission from the 3[rd] respondent. In the said counter affidavit, it has also been pointed out that, as per Annexure-III to CRZ notification, 1991, prior clearance is required to be obtained from the Ministry of Environment and Forests for construction of beach resorts and hotels in the designated areas of CRZ-III. 5.In such circumstances this Court deems it appropriate to restrain the petitioner from undertaking any construction activity, including repair works, in the property in question, for a period of two months. 6.The submission made by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is not having a D & O licence issued by the 2[nd] respondent Secretary of the Grama Panchayat and that, the petitioner has no intention to run the resort, without obtaining necessary D & O licence from the 2[nd] respondent is W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **8** recorded. 7.The 2[nd] respondent shall ensure that the petitioner is not undertaking any construction activity or repair works in the property in question and that, he is not running the resort. It will be open to the 2[nd] respondent, if found necessary, to get necessary police assistance for restraining such activities, invoking the provisions under sub-section (1) of Section 252 of the Kerala Panchayat Raj Act, 1994.” 6. By the order of this Court dated 17.06.2019, the interim order dated 03.04.2019 was extended further for a period of two months, restraining the petitioner from undertaking any construction activities including repair works in the property in question. The aforesaid orders dated 03.04.2019 and 17.06.2019 were under challenge in Writ Appeal No.1573 of 2019 filed before the Division Bench. The said writ appeal was dismissed as withdrawn by the judgment dated 12.07.2019, with liberty to the appellant/writ petitioner to move the Single Judge for modification of the interim order. Thereafter, various orders have been passed in this writ petition. The 2[nd] respondent has also filed Contempt Case (Civil) No.1503 of 2019 alleging non-compliance of the W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **9** directions contained in the orders of this Court dated 03.04.2019 and 17.06.2019. 7. The orders dated 03.04.2019 and 17.06.2019 are still in force. By the order dated 02.08.2019, the Station House Officer, Kuthiyathodu Police Station was suo motu impleaded as the additional 8[th] respondent. On 06.08.2019 the petitioner has filed reply affidavit to the counter affidavit of respondents 1 and 2, that rd th of the 3 respondent and that of the 7 respondent, producing therewith Exts.P14 to P16 documents. By the order dated 22.10.2019, Advocate P.A.Harish was appointed as Advocate Commissioner to conduct local inspection of the petitioner’s resort and to submit a report before this Court as to the nature of construction activities undertaken and other related matters. The Advocate Commissioner, who conducted inspection, has submitted a report dated 05.11.2019. The 2[nd] respondent Secretary of the Gram Panchayat has filed an objection dated 02.03.2019 to the report of the Advocate Commissioner. 8. On 17.01.2020, when this writ petition came up for consideration, along with Contempt Case (Civil) No.1503 of 2019, W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **10** this Court found that, for a proper consideration of the issues raised in this writ petition and the Contempt Case (Civil) No.1503 of 2019, the satellite data information and report of the island in question has to be obtained from the Kerala State Remote Sensing and Environment Centre (KSRSEC), Thiruvananthapuram. Accordingly, KSRSEC, represented by its Director was suo motu impleaded as the additional 9[th] respondent. By the order dated 17.01.2020, the additional 9[th] respondent was directed to submit satellite data information and report of the island in question, showing reclamations and constructions, if any, made after 1996, in order to ascertain whether there is any reclamation or construction in that island, especially in the property owned by the writ petitioner, in violation of CRZ notification and CZMP, 1996. 9. The report of the additional 9[th] respondent was placed on record on 24.02.2020, after serving a copy of the same to the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for the Grama Panchayat, the learned Government Pleader and also the learned counsel for the 7[th] respondent Federation. The petitioner has filed an objection to the report of the additional 9[th] W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **11** respondent, which is one dated 03.03.2020. 10. On 04.03.2020, when this writ petition came up for consideration, it was submitted that the title deeds of the property in question, along with prior documents will be produced before this Court, along with an application to accept additional documents. Thereafter, on 21.10.2020, the petitioner has filed an affidavit dated 19.10.2020, producing therewith Exts.P14 to P18 documents. 11. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, the learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2, the learned Standing Counsel for the 3[rd] respondent, the learned Government Pleader appearing for respondents 4 to 6 and additional respondents 8 and 10 to 12, the learned counsel for the 7[th] respondent and also the learned Standing Counsel for the additional 9[th] respondent. 12. The issue that arises for consideration in this writ petition relates to the resort owned by the petitioner, namely, 'Emerald Pristine Isle Resort', situated Ward No.7 of the 1[st] respondent Grama Panchayat, in an island known as Chalathrakkari. The document placed on record as Ext.P9 is a copy W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **12** of the report dated 20.03.2017 of the 5[th] respondent District Town Planner, addressed to the additional 10[th] respondent District Collector, which is based on the complaint made by the 7[th] respondent Ulnadan Malsya Thozhilali Federation, against the resort owned by the petitioner. As per Ext.P9 report, the resort in question is one constructed in violation of CRZ norms and also the relevant notifications. The 5[th] respondent forwarded Ext.P9 report to the District Collector, for necessary action. On receipt of Ext.P9 report, the District Collector forwarded a copy of the same to the 2[nd] respondent Secretary of the Grama Panchayat, for taking necessary action, vide Ext.P10 communication dated 30.03.2007. It is pursuant to the direction contained in Ext.P10 that the 2[nd] respondent issued Ext.P11 stop memo dated 03.12.2018, whereby the petitioner is restrained from proceeding with the construction in violation of Rule 7 of the Kerala Panchayat Building Rules, 2011. In the counter affidavit filed by the 3[rd] respondent, Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority, that filed by the Grama Panchayat (respondents 1 and 2) and also that filed by the 7[th] respondent Federation, the alleged statutory violations by the petitioner's W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **13** resort are pointed out. 13. During the course of arguments, the learned counsel for the petitioner would point out that the question as to violation of the CRZ norms, is yet to be decided by the additional 10[th] respondent District Collector. Similarly, the 2[nd] respondent, who is the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat is yet to take further action on Ext.P11 stop memo. The petitioner will raise appropriate contentions before the additional 10[th] respondent District Collector on Ext.P9 report, by submitting a reply and shall also submit a reply to Ext.P11 stop memo issued by the 2[nd] respondent Secretary, and the said respondents may be directed to consider those replies and take a direction as to the further course to be taken in the matter, after affording the petitioner and other affected parties a reasonable opportunity of being heard. 14. The learned counsel for respondents 1 and 2 would submit that the Secretary of the Grama Panchayat will submit a written submission before the additional 10[th] respondent raising legal and factual contentions, which are already raised before this Court. The learned counsel for the 7[th] respondent would submit W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **14** that, the said respondent will also submit a written submission before the additional 10[th] respondent and also before the 2[nd] respondent, raising legal and factual contentions. The learned counsel for the 7[th] respondent would also point out that the said respondent has already submitted Ext.R7(f) representation dated 27.02.2019, before the Revenue Divisional Officer, Alappuzha to demarcate the land under unauthorised occupation of the petitioner and restore to its original condition. Based on Ext.R7(f), the Revenue Divisional Officer has issued Ext.R7(g) communication, whereby the additional 11[th] respondent Tahsildar, Cherthala and also the Village Officer, Kodamthuruthu are directed to inspect the petitioner’s property and to remove the illegal encroachments. 15. The learned Government Pleader, on instructions would submit that, the survey and demarcation of the property are yet to be undertaken by the additional 12[th] respondent Taluk Surveyor. 16. Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides and also the pleadings and materials on record, this Court is of the view that, the additional W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **15** 10[th] respondent District Collector and the 2[nd] respondent Secretary of the Grama Panchayat has to finalise the proceedings initiated against the petitioner pursuant to Exts.P9 and P10, after giving a reasonable opportunity to both sides to substantiate their contentions. In such circumstances, this writ petition is disposed with the following directions; i) The additional 11[th] respondent Tahsildar (LR) shall take necessary steps to ensure that the additional 12[th] respondent Taluk Surveyor conducts survey of the properties, with notice to the petitioner, the 2[nd] respondent and also the 7[th] respondent and submit a report, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. On receipt of that report the additional 11[th] respondent shall forward the same to the additional 10[th] respondent District Collector. ii) On receipt of the report of additional 12[th] respondent Taluk Surveyor, the additional 10[th] respondent District Collector, who is also the Chairman of the 4[th] respondent District Level Coastal Zone Management Authority, Alappuzha, shall furnish copy of the same to the petitioner, the 2[nd] respondent and also to the 7[th] respondent. iii) Within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that report, the petitioner, the 2[nd] respondent and the 7[th] respondent shall submit their written submissions before the additional 10[th] respondent District collector on Ext.P9 report W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **16** dated 20.03.2017 of the 5[th] respondent District Town Planner. iv) Thereafter, the additional 10[th] respondent District Collector, who is the Chairman of the District Level Coastal Zone Management Committee, Alappuzha shall consider the rival contentions and take an appropriate decision as to the further course to be taken in the matter, taking note of the report of the additional 9[th] respondent, placed on record before this Court on 24.02.2020, the written submissions made by the petitioner, the 2[nd] respondent and the 7[th] respondent and, if found necessary, after obtaining necessary clarification from the 3[rd] respondent Kerala Coastal Zone Management Authority. Before taking such a decision, the additional 10[th] respondent shall give an opportunity of personal hearing to the petitioner, the 2[nd] respondent and also to the 7[th] respondent. The decision so taken shall be communicated to the parties, without any delay. v) Insofar as Ext.P11 stop memo issued by the 2[nd] respondent Secretary is concerned, after the decision taken by the additional 10[th] respondent as directed hereinbefore, the petitioner shall submit a proper reply to that show cause notice, within a period of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of that decision, with copy to the 7[th] respondent. vi) Thereafter, the 2[nd] respondent Secretary shall conduct a personal hearing, with notice to the petitioner and also to the 7[th] respondent and take an appropriate decision as to W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **17** further course to be taken on Ext.P11 stop memo and the decision so taken shall be communicated to the petitioner, and also to the 7[th] respondent, without any delay. vii) Till orders are passed by the additional 10[th] respondent, and thereafter by the 2[nd] respondent, as directed above, the interim order granted by this Court on 03.04.2019 shall continue to be in force. viii) Registry shall forward the original report of the additional 9[th] respondent produced before this Court on 24.02.2020, to the additional 10[th] respondent District Collector, who is the Chairman of the District Level Coastal Zone Management Committee, Alappuzha, after retaining an attested colour photocopy of that report in the judges papers. 17. The legal and factual contentions raised by both sides are left open to be raised before the appropriate authority, at the appropriate stage. 18. In **State of U.P. v. Harish Chandra [(1996) 9 SCC 309]** the Apex Court held that no mandamus can be issued to direct the Government to refrain from enforcing the provisions of law or to do something which is contrary to law. In **Bhaskara Rao** **A.B. v. CBI [(2011) 10 SCC 259]** the Apex Court reiterated that, generally, no Court has competence to issue a direction contrary to law nor can the Court direct an authority to act in W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **18** contravention of the statutory provisions. The courts are meant to enforce the rule of law and not to pass the orders or directions which are contrary to what has been injected by law. 19. Therefore, in terms of the direction contained in this judgment, the 2[nd] and 10[th] respondents shall take appropriate decision in the matter, strictly in accordance with law, taking note of the relevant statutory provisions and also the law on the point. No order as to costs. **Sd/-** **ANIL K. NARENDRAN JUDGE** SPR W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **19** ## **APPENDIX OF WP(C) 4404/2019** **PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 30.05.2016.** **EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 16.01.2017.** **EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 28.04.2017 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER, IRRIGATION SUB DIVISION, KUTTANAD.** **EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSES DATED 02.07.2018 BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPTS DATED 29.03.2016. EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE CONSENT DATED 24.6.2015 ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD. EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C)NO.22822/2015 DATED 21.03.2016. EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) NO.5435/2017 DATED 26.03.2017.** **EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 20.03.2017 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.03.2017 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED 03.12.2018 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE EXPLANATION DATED 01.01.2019 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER.** W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **20** **EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE RESORT OF THE PETITIONER.** **EXHIBIT P14 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 25.04.2019 UNDER THE RTI ACT** - **EXHIBIT P15 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 06.05.2019 UNDER THE RTI ACT** - **EXHIBIT P16 TRUE COPY OF THE PLAN EXHIBIT P17 TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED DEED OF CONVEYANCE DATED 30.12.2004.** - **EXHIBIT P18 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1037/2004 DATED 26.03.2004.** - **EXHIBIT P18(a) TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO.1036/2004 DATED 26.03.2004.** - **EXHIBIT P19 TRUE COPY OF THE ENCUMBRANCE CERTIFICATE NO.5163/2020 DATED 01.10.2020 OF KODAMTHURUTHU VILLAGE FROM 1985-2020.** - **EXHIBIT P20 TRUE COPY OF THE DEED NO.581/1979 DATED 16.02.1979 OF KUTHIYATHODU SRO.** **EXHIBIT P20(a) TRUE COPY OF THE DEED NO.1370/1987 DATED 21.05.1987. EXHIBIT P21 TRUE COPY OF THE DEED NO.3368/2002 DATED 11.12.2002 OF KUTHIYATHODU SRO.** **RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:** **EXHIBIT R2(a) COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED 21-02-2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE MANAGING DIRECTOR OF THE PETITIONER.** W.P.(C) No.4404 OF 2019 **21** **EXHIBIT R2(b)** **COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 26-02-2019 SUBMITTED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** **EXHIBIT R2(C)** **COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 01-03-2019 FILED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE S.I OF POLICE KUTHIAYATHODU.** **EXHIBIT R2(d)** **COPY OF THE ORDER NO.C4-1700/2017 DATED 12-07-2017 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT R-7(a)** - **TRUE COPY OF THE STOP MEMO DATED 5-092014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT R-7(b)** **TRUE COPY OF THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION DETAILS DATED 2-2-2015** - **EXHIBIT R-7(c)** - **TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 6- 1-2017 BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT** - **EXHIBIT R-7(d)** **TRUE COPY OF PHOTOGRAPH OF THE PRESENT STAGE OF THE RESORT OF THE PETITIONER** - **EXHIBTI R-7(e) TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO. 2049/2002** - **EXHIBIT R-7(f)** - **TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 27-22019 SUBMITTED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT.** - **EXHIBIT R-7(g) TRUE COPY OF DIRECTION VIDE No.M.1236/2019 OF SUB COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA** - **EXHIBIT R8 (a) TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 03.07.2019.** - **EXHIBIT R8 (B) TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT SUBMITTED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT TO THE SHO DATED 17.07.2019.**