Disposed

Thomas T. Lukose v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC16 Nov 2018WP(C)/24806/2017

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Kerala High Court directed the State Government to consider the petitioner's representation and application for the assignment of 25 cents of land comprising Survey No. 429/17 under Rule 21(ii) of the Kerala Municipal Assignment Rules, 1995 within four months, after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 1st respondent to consider the petitioner's representation and application for land assignment within four months, after affording a reasonable opportunity of hearing.

Thomas T. Lukose Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2018)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2018/25TH KARTHIKA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No.24806 of 2017

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

THOMAS T. LUKOSE, MANAGING PARTNER, BIMAL TOM INDUSTRIES, RAJAGIRI VALLEY P.O., KAKKANAD - 682 039.

¶8

BY ADVOCATES SMT.K.P.SANTHI & SRI.RILGIN V.GEORGE

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 001.

¶11

2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ERNAKULAM - 682 030, 3 THE TAHSILDAR, KANAYANNUR TALUK, TALUK OFFICE, KANAYANNUR, PARK AVENUE ROAD, ERNAKULAM - 682 011. SMT.A.C.VIDHYA, GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶12

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 16.11.2018, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶13

ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.

¶14

W.P.(C)No.24806 of 2017

¶15

Dated this the 16^th day of November, 2018

¶16

J U D G M E N T

¶17

The prayers in the above Writ Petition (Civil) are as follows.

¶18

“

¶19

i. issue a writ of mandamus or such other writ, direction or order compelling the 1^st respondent to consider Exhibit P1 representation on the merits after affording the petitioner an opportunity of hearing within a time frame to be fixed by this Honourable Court.

¶20

ii. Declare that the petitioners are eligible and entitled to be assigned the 25 cents of land comprised in Survey No.429/17 in Kakkanad Village, Kanayannur Taluk, which is in his uninterrupted possession.

¶21

iii. Issue such other writ, direction or order as is deemed just and necessary in the facts, features and circumstances of the case.”

¶22

Heard Smt.K.P.Santhi, learned counsel appearing for

¶23

the petitioner and Smt.A.C.Vidhya, learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondents.

¶24

The petitioner and his predecessors claims to be in possession and enjoyment of 25 cents of land in Survey No.429/17 of Kakkanad Village, Kanayyanur Taluk, Ernakulam Revenue District for more than 50 years. The land lies along with the registered holding of the petitioner measuring 19.99 ares in survey

¶25

W.P.(C).No.24806/2017

¶26

..3..

¶27

No. 429/8, Block No.9 in Kakkanad Village, Kanayannur Taluk, Ernakulam Revenue District. The petitioner had submitted application for assignment of the abovesaid land under the Kerala Land Assignment Act and the Rules framed thereunder and submitted Ext.P-2 application along with Ext.P-1 representation to the 1^st respondent. The 1^st respondent State Government has special powers under the Municipal Assignment Rules for assigning land to the occupant under Rule 21(ii) of The Municipal Assignment Rules, 1995, and that the 1^st respondent will be directed to consider Ext.P-2 application on merits after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner etc. Taking note of the abovesaid facts and circumstances of the case it is ordered that the competent authority - the 1^st respondent State Authority will take up the request made by the petitioner in Ext.P-2 application, Ext.P-1 representation without further delay and after following the necessary formalities may finalise the request made therein in the matter of assignment of land without further delay and preferably within a period of 4 months from the date of production

¶28

W.P.(C).No.24806/2017

¶29

..4..

¶30

of a certified copy of this judgment and after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or to his authorised representative if any in the abovesaid process. The 1^st respondent may ensure that necessary procedures and formalities for conduct of enquiry, obtaining of report from the competent revenue officials concerned etc. may also be made and copies of said report may also be made available to the petitioner and petitioner's submission may also be duly taken into consideration and reasonable opportunity of being heard as aforestated may also be granted before final orders are passed as aforestated within the abovesaid time limit.

¶31

With these observations and directions, the above Writ Petition (Civil) will stand finally disposed of.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE

¶34

MMG

¶35

W.P.(C).No.24806/2017

¶36

..5..

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶39

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 13-4-2017 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT. XHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 134-2017 SUBMITTED TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Thomas T. Lukose v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Thomas T. Lukose v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Thressia Paul Vs the District Collector

Jacob Japasingh Vs State of Kerala

Joju John Vs Assistant Executive Engineer

Joby Mathew Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Karim .M Vs State of Kerala

Anitha Govindan Vs Special Tahsildar (L.a)