Disposed

Susheela v. Village Officer

Kerala HC24 Feb 2016WP(C)/4838/2016

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition, the petitioner alleged that Revenue Officials refused to issue a possession certificate for Survey No. 3205/3. The Court directed the Additional Tahsildar to identify the land based on title deeds, issue notices to actual occupants if any, and complete the enquiry within two months.

What did the court decide?

Directed the Additional Tahsildar, Palakkad, to identify the land, issue notice to any person found in possession, and complete the enquiry within two months.

Susheela Vs Village Officer — Service and Employment | Kerala HC (2016)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.MUHAMED MUSTAQUE

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2016/5TH PHALGUNA, 1937

¶5

WP(C).No. 4838 of 2016 (D)

¶6

PETITIONER :

¶7

------------------

¶8

SUSHEELA, AGED 60 YEARS, W/O.K.N.GOPINATHAN, MANIYAMKAD, KOPPAM, PALAKKAD - 678 001.

¶9

BY ADV. SRI.BINOY VASUDEVAN

¶10

RESPONDENTS:-:

¶11

-----------------------

¶12

1. VILLAGE OFFICER PALAKKAD 3 VILLAGE, PALAKKAD - 678 001.

¶13

2. THE TOWN SURVEYOR,

¶14

MUNCIPAL OFFICE COMPOUND, PALAKKAD - 678 001.

¶15

*ADDL. R3 IMPLEADED :

¶16

3. THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, PALAKKAD

¶17

ADDL. R3 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER JUDGMENT DT 24/2/2016

¶18

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. MANOJ KUNJACHAN

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 24-02-2016, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

WP(C).No. 4838 of 2016 (D)

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS

¶24

EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGES OF THE BTR OF THE PROPERTY.

¶25

EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER'S FATHER BEARING NO.245/1975 OF LAND TRIBUNAL, PALAKKAD.

¶26

EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.24/2007 OF S.R.O., PALAKKAD. EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE FIELD SKETCH OF THE SUB DIVIDED PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER.

¶27

EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ADDRESSED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS PALAKKAD TO THE TAHSILDAR PALAKKAD.

¶28

EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT FOR THE PROPERTY PRESENTLY HAVING AN EXTENT OF 14 CENTS IN SY.NO.3205/3 IN PALAKKAD 3 VILLAGE.

¶29

EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 08.09.2015 FOR ISSUANCE OF POSSESSION CERTIFICATE.

¶30

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS : NIL.

//TRUE COPY//

P.A. TO JUDGE

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE, J.

¶35

W.P.(C).No. 4838 of 2016

¶36

Dated this the 24^th day of February, 2016

¶37

JUDGMENT

¶38

The petitioner approached this Court alleging that the

¶39

Revenue Officials refused to issue possession certificate to

¶40

the petitioner in respect of the property comprised in

¶41

Survey No. 3205/3 in Palakkad 3 Village.

¶42

The petitioner submits that the Revenue Officials

¶43

have received the basic tax from the petitioner. Therefore,

¶44

there is no dispute regarding the possession.

¶45

The learned Government Pleader, on instructions,

¶46

would submit that the petitioner is not in possession of the

¶47

above land.

¶48

This Court is of the view that the petitioner shall approach the Additional Tahsildar, Palakkad to identify his

¶49

W.P.(C).No. 4838 of 2016 -2-

¶50

land based on the title deed. The Additional Tahsildar shall

¶51

identify his land in the presence of the petitioner. If any other person is in possession of the land, certainly, notice shall be issued to such person. Based on the outcome of the enquiry to be conducted by the Additional Tahsildar, basic tax shall be accepted or refused from the petitioner. Needful exercise shall be completed within a period of two months from the request of the petitioner.

¶52

The Additional Tahsildar, Palakkad, is suo motu impleaded as an additional third respondent.

¶53

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶54

Sd/-

¶55

A. MUHAMED MUSTAQUE JUDGE

¶56

bpr

Susheela v. Village Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Susheela v. Village 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

Karthika Ramachandran Vs Regional Passport Officer

Thoppil Contractors (India) Pvt. Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

U.A. Abdul Azeez Vs the Environmental Enginner

P.K.Unnikrishnan Vs K.Sivakumaran Unnithan

Susamma Varghese Vs Sri. M. Shamsudheen

Muhammed Jabir Vs the Union of India