Disposed

Krishnankutty v. Govt.of Kerala & Others

Kerala HC19 Nov 2012WP(C)/12548/2008

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

writ petitioner sought reconstruction of land bought-in due to default payment under Kerala Revenue Recovery Act, citing earlier decisions. Justice Harun-ul-Rashid directed the Principal Secretary to consider the representation after hearing within three months.

What did the court decide?

Determination directed to the second respondent to consider the representation and pass an order after affording the petitioner an opportunity to be heard within three months.

Krishnankutty Vs Govt.of Kerala & Others — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2012)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE HARUN-UL-RASHID

¶4

MONDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2012/28TH KARTHIKA 1934

¶5

WP(C).No. 12548 of 2008 (R)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

KRISHNANKUTTY.V.P.,AGED 53 YEARS,S/O.KORU, GANAPATHIYIL VEEDU, KATTIPPARUTHI VILLAGE, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.VIJAYA BHANU SRI.M.GEORGE THOMAS

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. GOVERNMENT OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY

¶11

ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM

¶12

2. THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,

¶13

REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶14

3. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, MALAPPURAM.

¶15

4. THE COMMISSIONER, LAND REVENUE,

¶16

PUBLIC OFFICE BUILDING, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶17

5. THE TAHSILDAR, TIRUR.

¶18

6. THE VILLAGE OFFICER,

¶19

KATTIPPARUTHI VILLAGE, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

¶20

*ADDL.R7 IMPLEADED

¶21

R7. THE DISTRICT INSPECTOR, TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND, TODDY WORKERS WELFARE FUND OFFICE, MALAPPURAM. PIN - 682 511.

¶22

*ADDL. R7 IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 13/03/2012 IN IA 3575/2012.

¶23

R1 TO R6 BY ADV. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI.NOUSHAD THOTTATHIL ADDL.R7 BY ADV. SRI.K.D.BABU,SC,KTWWFB

¶24

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 19-11-2012, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶25

sts

¶26

WP(C)NO.12548/2008

¶27

APPENDIX

¶28

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶29

P1 COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 20/1/1989 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT

¶30

P2 COPY OF THE NOTICE OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT FOR SALE OF THE PROPERTY ON 30/3/1989

¶31

P3 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 5/10/2004 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER.

¶32

P4 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.74559/H I/2007/REV. DATED 9/1/2007 OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶33

P5 COPY OF THE G.O.(RT)NO.4064/05/RD DATED 18/7/2005

¶34

P6 COPY OF THE LETTER NO.LR B5-4784/08 DATED 7/2/08 OF THE 4TH RESPONDENT

¶35

P7 COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 24/3/08 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

¶36

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS:

NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A.TO.JUDGE

sts

HARUN-UL-RASHID,J.

¶42

W.P.(C) No.12548 of 2008

¶43

Dated this the 19^th day of November 2012

¶44

JUDGMENT

¶45

The writ petition is filed seeking to quash Exts.P1, P2, P4 & P6 and for a direction directing the second respondent to consider Ext.P7 representation within a time limit to be fixed by this Court and for other incidental reliefs.

¶46

Petitioner defaulted payment of Toddy Workers Welfare Fund amount. The Tahsildar had initiated revenue recovery steps during January 1989. The Tahsildar issued notice under section 34 of the Kerala Revenue Recovery Act on 20.1.1989 for attaching petitioner's 12 cents of immovable property with all improvements in R.Sy.No.198/1,2 in Kattiparuthi Village. Sale notice in form No. 16 under Section 49(2) of the Act had been issued. The property was put on auction on 30.3.1989. The land was purchased by the Government. The auction was confirmed on 3.9.1989. Since then, the land has been registered as bought-in-land in the revenue records and the defaulter was not removed from the land.

¶47

The petitioner submitted a representation stating that he is ready to pay the arrears with interest and requested to

¶48

w.p.(c) No.12548/2012 2

¶49

re-convey the property to the defaulter. Subsequently, on 24.1.2008 the petitioner submitted another representation for reconveying the bought-in-land. Government rejected the petitioner's request vide letter No. 74559/H1/07/Rev. dated 9.1.2007. The Commissioner of Land Revenue also rejected his representation as per L.R.No.B5-4784/08 dated 7.2.2008.

¶50

In the counter affidavit filed by the 4^th respondent it is stated that 5^th respondent has completed the sale proceedings on the attached land under Revenue Recovery Act long back and therefore, the 2^nd respondent has many limitations to consider the request of the petitioner.

¶51

Petitioner submitted Ext.P7 representation dated 24.3.07 to the 2^nd respondent stating that he is willing to pay the entire amount due to the Government and further requested to re-convey the land. It is also pointed out that in similar cases properties were re-conveyed to the land owners after 25 years. Petitioner also pointed out that this is his only property and that he and his family members are residing there, was bought in by the Government for 10 paise. It is also submitted that petitioner was not aware that the property was bid by the Government on 30.3.1989 and he was not informed that fact by the authorities and he came to know about the said fact from the Village Officer, when he came to the property in the year 2004. The land was purchased by the Government on 30.3.1989 and the

¶52

w.p.(c) No.12548/2012

¶53

¶54

auction sale was confirmed by the Sub Collector,

¶55

Perinthalmanna on 3.9.1989. Thereafter, the land has registered as bought-in-land in the revenue records.

¶56

In the said circumstance, it is for the Government to take a decision as to whether such a property can be recoveyed to the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this Court the decision in Ayisha Teacher v. District Collector reported in (2009 (4) KLT 53) and District Collector v. Subaida Beevi reported in (2010 (1) KLT 913) .

¶57

The writ petition was filed on 9.4.2008. Taking into consideration the facts and circumstance of the case, the writ petition is disposed of, directing the 2^nd respondent to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 representation after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment. The decision shall be taken after considering the decision cited above.

¶58

Sd/- HARUN-UL-RASHID JUDGE

¶59

al/-

Krishnankutty v. Govt.of Kerala & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Krishnankutty v. Govt.of Kerala & Others

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Jimmy Joseph Vs Additional Registering Authority

Nalini.a.K. Vs State of Kerala

Chandrasekhara Pillai P. Vs Deputy Director, Department of Dairy Development

Dr. C.N. Jeevan Raj Vs Regionala Provident Fund Commissioner

The Malappauram District Co-Op.Bank Ltd. Vs the Returning Officer and Another

M.S.Raju Vs the State Co-Operative Election Commission