Quashed

Elikutty Philip v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC12 Feb 2016WP(C)/3607/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court quashed an order registering the petitioner's son's date of birth issued without hearing the petitioner. The Court directed the Revenue Divisional Officer to pass a fresh order after hearing the petitioner in person, fixing a date for appearance.

What did the court decide?

Quashing of Ext. P7 order; direction to 1st Respondent to pass orders anew after hearing the petitioner in person.

Elikutty Philip Vs the Revenue… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE V.CHITAMBARESH

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/23RD MAGHA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 3607 of 2016 (A)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

ELIKUTTY PHILIP, AGED 86 YEARS W/O.PHILIP, MULAVELIPURATH HOUSE 1/17(7/4) ERUVESSY P.O., CHEMBERI, KANNUR KERALA REPRESENTED BY HER POWER OF ATTORNEY C.D.THOMAS AGED 48, S/O.C.T.DEVASSY, CHIRAYIL HOUSE PALLICHAL ROAD, THOPPUMPADY, KOCHI-682 005.

¶8

BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.IBRAHIM SMT.K.P.AMBIKA SMT.A.A.SHIBI

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1. THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER KANNUR, PIN-670 001.

¶11

2. THE REGISTRAR FOR BIRTH AND DEATH ERUVESSY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, CHEMPERI P.O. KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 632.

¶12

3. THE SECRETARY ERUVESSY GRAMA PANCHAYAT, CHEMPERI P.O. KANNUR DISTRICT, PIN-670 632.

¶13

BY SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SANJEETHA K.A.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No. 3607 of 2016 (A)

¶16

APPENDIX

¶17

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶18

EXT.P1-	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 16.7.2015.
EXT.P2-	TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.8.015 IN WPC NO.25923/2015.
EXT.P3-	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 17.9.2015 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE RESPONDENT
EXT.P4-	TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION DATED 3.9.2015 RECEIVED FROM THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXT.P5-	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED NIL AND THE POSTAL COVER IN WHICH IT WAS SENT BY POST
EXT.P6-	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 31.10.2015 ALONG WITH ITS POSTAL COVER
EXT.P7-	TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 5.11.2015 SERVED ON THE PETITIONER ON 16.11.2015 AT 3 PM BY AN OFFICE STAFF OF THE VILLAGE OFFICE.
EXT.P8-	TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT FILED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN THE CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE NO.1576/2015 DATED 1.1.2016
EXT.P9-	A TRUE COPY OF THE BAPTISM CERTIFICATE FROM ST.ANNE'S TOWN CHURCH, PAYYAVOOR DATED 27.8.2012.
EXT.P10-	TRUE COPY OF THE SECONDARY SCHOOL LEAVING CERTIFICATE.
EXT.P11-	TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 5.6.2015 RECEIVED FROM THE 2ND RESPONDENT
EXT.P12(a)-	TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 17.7.2015 SWORN TO BY THACHAPARAMBIL PHILIP, S/O.UTHUP.
EXT.-12(b)-	TRUE COPY OF THE AFFIDAVIT DATED 17.7.2015 SWORN TO BY KOCHUPURACKAL MARTHA, W/O.CHACKO.

¶19

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS :- NIL

/TRUE COPY/

P.A. TO JUDGE.

DCS

V. CHITAMBARESH, J

¶24

W.P.(C). No. 3607 OF 2016

¶25

Dated this the 12^th day of February, 2016

¶26

JUDGMENT

¶27

The petitioner challenges Ext. P7 order issued by the first respondent. The same pertains to the registration of the date of birth of the son of the petitioner. The main grievance is that the petitioner was not heard before passing Ext. P7 order.

¶28

The Senior Government Pleader points out that the petitioner was deliberately dodging notice. The plea that the petitioner was not heard is bereft of bonafides. Of course the Government is of not averse for affording one more opportunity to the petitioner as a final chance.

¶29

I quash Ext. P7 order and direct the first respondent to pass orders anew. The same shall be done after hearing the petitioner in person. The petitioner for that purpose shall appear in the office of the first respondent at 11. A.M. on 25.02.2016. The petitioner shall be heard with reference to the documents produced and orders passed. Final orders shall be passed by the first respondent on or before 29.02.2016.

¶30

The writ petition is disposed of.

¶31

V. CHITAMBARESH JUDGE

¶32

DCS

Elikutty Philip v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Elikutty Philip v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Malayapura Akbar Vs M.K.Cheriya Koya, Land Revenue Collector, Kavarathy

Renny K John Vs N E Salim

K.K.Vinod Vs Muralikrishnan

Susheela B. Vs Biju Prabhakar, District Collector, Trivandrum

Elikutty Philip Vs Ms. Navjyot Khosa

Somi Joseph Vs Secretary, Regional Transport Authority