Disposed

Shajahan, v. the Commissioner

Kerala HC30 Jan 2019WP(C)/2613/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court disposed of a writ petition challenging a Revenue Divisional Officer's order under the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967. Acknowledging the past appeal period, the Court allowed the petitioner liberty to file an appeal within three weeks, treating it timely.

What did the court decide?

Liberty granted to petitioner to submit an appeal before the 1st respondent within three weeks from receipt of judgment copy.

Shajahan, Vs the Commissioner — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY

¶4

WEDNESDAY,THE 30TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 10TH MAGHA, 1940

¶5

WP(C).No. 2613 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SHAJAHAN,

¶8

S/O. ABDUL RAHMANKUTTY, VALLAYAKATHU HOUSE, PALISSERY P.O., EDAVILANGU, KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER, ABDUL KAREEM, S/O. PUTHUVETTIL BAVA, AGED 63 YEARS, KANIMANGALAM P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT.

¶9

BY ADVS. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN SMT.T.V.NEEMA

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 THE COMMISSIONER, LAND REVENUE, COMMISSIONERATE OF LAND REVENUE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.

¶12

2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT – 680 121.

¶13

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, EDAVILANGU P.O., KODUNGALLUR TALUK, THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680671.

¶14

SRI.MANURAJ.K.J,GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 30.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C).No. 2613 of 2019

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner challenging Ext.P7 order passed by the Revenue Divisional Officer dated 7.12.2018, apparently, under the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as 'Order, 1967' for short).

¶20

In my considered view, there is a clear remedy of appeal provided under Order, 1967, enabling the petitioner to prefer an appeal before the Commissioner, Land Revenue Commissionerate of Land Revenue, ie. the 1^st respondent. However, learned Counsel for the petitioner submitted that already 30 days period is over.

¶21

Having heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader this writ petition is disposed of, leaving open the liberty of the petitioner to submit suitable appeal before the 1^st respondent, within three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and if it is filed so, it will be treated as an appeal filed within time and consider the same on merits in accordance with law, at the earliest possible

¶22

WP(C).No. 2613 of 2019

¶23

¶24

time, after providing an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner.

Sd/

SHAJI P.CHALY

JUDGE

Jm/

WP(C).No. 2613 of 2019

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX

¶32

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶33

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DOCUMENT NO.3734/2014 OF SRO, KODUNGALLUR DATED 20/09/2014.

¶34

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER DATED 24/02/2018.Q

¶35

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT DATED 04/05/2017.

¶36

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED 13/09/2017.

¶37

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT UNDER CLAUSE 6 OF KERALA LAND UTILISATION ORDER DATED 25/02/2018.

¶38

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WRIT PETITION 9628/2018 DATED 28/03/2018.

¶39

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IRINJALAKUDA DATED 07/12/2018.

¶40

EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS TO SHOW THE NATURE OF THE PROPERTY.

¶41

EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY.

Shajahan, v. the Commissioner

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shajahan, v. the Commissioner

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

Sebastian K.John Vs Geologist

Mohammed Rasheed C., Vs the Kottakkal Muncipality

Raman Vs Parakadavu Grama Panchayath

Saranya, Vs Revenue Divisional Officer

Mascom Steels (India) Pvt. Ltd., Vs the Secretary

Bindu N.K., Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer