Disposed

R.Vijayan v. District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram

Kerala HC7 Feb 2017WP(C)/1136/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Ex-service petitioner sought directions under the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961 for survey, demarcation of property boundaries, and enquiry into unauthorized excavation. The court directed the Tahsildar to consider the pending application with notice within three months and instructed the Collector to ascertain intervention requirements.

What did the court decide?

Direction to 2nd Respondent to consider pending survey application with notice of hearing and attain finality within three months; 1st Respondent to ascertain intervention requirements.

R.Vijayan Vs District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2017)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT:

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2017/18TH MAGHA, 1938

¶5

WP(C).No. 1136 of 2017 (N)

¶6

PETITIONER(S):

¶7

R.VIJAYAN, S/O.RAGHAVAN, AGED 69 YEARS, ABHAYAM, OONNAMPARA, AANAKKUDY P.O., VAMANAPURAM, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

¶8

BY ADV. SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH

¶9

RESPONDENT(S):

¶10

1. DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶11

2. TAHSILDAR, TALUK OFFICE, NEDUMANGADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 541.

¶12

3. VILLAGE OFFICER, VAMANAPURAM VILLAGE, NEDUMANGAD, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 541.

¶13

4. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, CENTRAL SURVEY OFFICE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

¶14

5. SANAKAN, CHAVARUKONATH HOUSE, OONNAMPARA, KARIMKUTTYKARA P.O., THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 581.

¶15

6. RANJAN, PRASAD MANDIRAM, OONAMPARA, AANAKUDI, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 583.

¶16

7. DEVAN, ALUMKUNNIL VEEDU, KEERTHYMOODU, KARIMKUTTYKARA P.O., VAMANAPURAM 695 606.

¶17

8. SASI, COLONY NIVAS, EETTIMOODU, KARIMKUTTYKARA P.O., VAMANAPURAM 695 606.

¶18

9. SUB INSPECTOR OF POLICE, STATION HOUSE OFFICER, VENJARAMOODE POLICE STATION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 607. R1-4 BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. K.R. DEEPA

¶19

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07-02-2017, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶20

¶21

WP(C).No. 1136 of 2017 (N)

¶22

APPENDIX

¶23

PETITIONER(S)' --------------	EXHIBITS ---------
EXT.P1	TRUE COPY OF THE APPLI PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4/3/2013	CATION PREFERRED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TAHSILDAR DATED
EXT.P2	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESP 15/10/2013 TO THE ASSI OFFICE, NEDUMANGAD,THI	INTIMATION SEEN ISSUED FROM THE ONDENT TAHSILDAR DATED STANT DIRECTOR, CENTRAL SURVEY RUVANANTHAPURAM.
EXT.P3	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITIONER'S PROPERTY	SETTLEMENT REGISTER OF THE SUBMITTED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT
EXT.P4	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE	COMPLAINT PREFERRED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXT.P4(A)	TRUE COPY OF THE RECEI DATED 27/1/2016	PT ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT
EXT.P5	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE	REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 3/2/2016
EXT.P6	TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE	REPRESENTATION PREFERRED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 18/11/2016

¶24

RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS

NIL

TRUE COPY

P.S. TO JUDGE

SHAJI P. CHALY, J.

¶30

W.P.(C). No.1136 of 2017 ----------------------------------------------Dated this the 7^th day of February, 2017

¶31

JUDGMENT

¶32

Petitioner is an ex-service man, who has preferred Ext.P1 before the 2^nd respondent and Exts.P5 and P6 before the 1^st respondent purportedly under the provisions of the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act, 1961 for survey and demarcation of the boundary of the property owned by the petitioner and also to hold an enquiry into the unauthorized escavation activity of respondents 5 to 8. According to the petitioner, in spite of all the earnest efforts of the petitioner, finality is not arrived at by respondents 1 and 2 in the application so submitted by the petitioner. It is in this background appropriate directions are sought.

¶33

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Government Pleader. In view of the limited nature of order I propose to pass, notice to respondents 5 to 8 are dispensed with.

¶34

In view of the pendency of Ext.P1 statutory application before the 2^nd respondent, there will be a direction to the 2^nd

¶35

W.P.(C). No.1136 of 2017

¶36

¶37

respondent to take on board Ext.P1 and consider the same in accordance with law, after providing notice of hearing to the petitioner and respondents 5 to 8 or any other interested or affected persons and attain finality to the same within three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. The 1^st respondent shall after orders are passed by the 2^nd respondent, ascertain whether any intervention is required as per Exts.P5 and P6 applications submitted by the petitioner.

¶38

Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶39

Sd/- SHAJI P. CHALY JUDGE

¶40

smv 07.02.2017

R.Vijayan v. District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

R.Vijayan v. District Collector, Thiruvananthapuram

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

K.Sreekumar Vs K.R.Jyothilal

Peggy Shaju Vs S.Venkiteshpathi

Kannur Jill Thuramugha Thozhilali Kshema Sahakarana Sangham Ltd. Vs Ajith Patil

G.Soman Vs Mr.H.Venkitesh

S.K.Sharma Vs Taluk Land Board, Fortcochin, Represented by Its Chairman

Koshy Philip @ Padinjattedathu Koshy Philip Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer