Bench dismissed a writ petition challenging the Kerala Lok Ayukta's order granting mutation. The Court held that mutation orders are for fiscal purposes and do not affect title, especially when the petitioner has a pending suit for reconveyance. Thus, no grounds were found to entertain the petition.
Writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE P.N.RAVINDRAN
THURSDAY, THE 6TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2014/17TH MAGHA, 1935
WP(C).No. 1544 of 2014 (P)
PETITIONER :
RADHA @ RADAMMAL, D/O.RAJAMMA, ANAKUDIMURI, KODITHOOKKIYA KUNNU KAZHUKANPATTIYAKALAYIL, CHARUVILA PUTHEN VEEDU KALLARA VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD.
BY ADV. SRI.M.DINESH
RESPONDENT(S) :
1. VILLAGE OFFICER, KALLARA, NEDUMANGAD TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695541.
2. ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, NEDUMANGAD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695541.
3. ABIDEEN,
S/O.ILLIAS, RESIDENT OF ASIF MANZIL, K.T.KUNNU ANAKUDIMURI, KALLARA, NEDUMANGAD THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695541.
R1 & R2 BY SR. GOVT. PLEADER SRI. K.C. VINCENT
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 06-02-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
Mn
...2/-
WP(C).No. 1544 of 2014 (P)
APPENDIX
PETITIONERS' EXHIBITS :
EXT. P1: COPY OF THE COMPLAINT NO.819/2013 FILED BEFORE THE HON'BLE LOK AYUKTHA, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DATED 4.12.2013.
EXT. P2: COPY OF THE OBJECTION FILED BY THE WRIT PETITIONER/3RD RESPONDENT BEFORE THE LOK AYUKTA DATED 24.10.2013.
EXT. P3: COPY OF THE REPORT OF LOK AYUKTA ORDER DATED 4.12.13 IN COMPLAINANT NO.819/2013 DATED 29.6.2013.
RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.S. TO JUDGE
Mn
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
W.P.(C).No.1544 of 2014
Dated this the 6th day of February, 2014
JUDGMENT
Ext.P3 order passed by the Kerala Lok Ayukta on 4.12.2013 in Complaint No.819 of 2013 filed by the third respondent herein is under challenge in this writ petition. By that order the Kerala Lok Ayukta held that the third respondent is entitled to have his application to effect mutation in the revenue records granted and mutation effected in his favour. A report was accordingly sent to the competent authority with the following recommendation:-
“Mutation of the property having an extent of 50 cents comprised in Re-Sy.No.3046/2-3 and 3047/1-3 of Kallara Village covered by Ext.P1 sale deed No.1733/2012 of SRO Kallara will be effected in favour of the complainant within one month from this day.”
W.P(C)No.1544/2014
-:2:-
Therefore, the mere fact that mutation will now be effected in favour of the third respondent herein is not a reason to hold that the impugned order should be set aside.
I therefore find no grounds to entertain the writ petition. The writ petition fails and is accordingly dismissed with the above observation.
P.N.RAVINDRAN, Judge.
ahg.
P.N.RAVINDRAN, J.
W.P.(C).No.1544 of 2014
JUDGMENT
6th February, 2014
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the writ petition challenging the Lok Ayukta's order granting mutation in favour of the third respondent should be entertained despite the pending suit for reconveyance.
Whether the petitioner is entitled to have the writ petition dismissed on the grounds that the petition fails.
Radha @ Radammal
Village Officer, Kallara
Additional Tahsildar, Nedumangad
Abideen
P.N. Ravindran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
