Disposed

Shamla Krishnan @ Shamla. v. District Collector

Kerala HC16 Jul 2019WP(C)/5263/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This court disposed of a writ petition by directing the additional revenue respondent to finalise proceedings initiated by the petitioners regarding land conversion, after a personal hearing, and to communicate the decision within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the additional Revenue Divisional Officer to finalise the proceedings initiated by the petitioners after a personal hearing and communicate the decision within two months.

Shamla Krishnan @ Shamla. Vs District Collector — Property and Title | Kerala HC (2019)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF JULY 2019 / 25TH ASHADHA, 1941

¶5

WP(C).No.5263 of 2019

¶6

PETITIONERS:

¶7

1 SHAMLA KRISHNAN @ SHAMLA.,AGED 52 YEARS D/O RAMAKRISHNAN, PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, PATTANAKKAD, CHERTHALA,ALAPPUZHA.

¶8

2 SHEEBA KRISHNAN, AGED 50 YEARS, D/O RAMAKRISHNAN, PUTHENPURAYIL HOUSE, PATTANAKKAD, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA., NOW RESIDING AT KOMATH HOUSE, MURIKKUMPADOM, AZHEEKAL POST, KOCHI - 682 508.

¶9

3 SALVIN, AGED 43 YEARS,S/O JANARDHANAN, THEKKEKANNAATT HOUSE, PADINJAATTUMKARA VADAKKUMMURIYIL, KUTHIYATHODU VILLAGE, ALAPPUZHA.

¶10

BY ADV. SRI.DENIZEN KOMATH

¶11

RESPONDENTS:

¶12

1 DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, ALAPPUZHA-688001.

¶13

2 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE (LLMC)/ CONVENOR,AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, PATTANAKKAD, CHERTHALA, ALAPPUZHA-688531.

¶14

ADDL. R3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, DISTRICT COURT WAY ROAD, KIDANGAMPARAMP, THONDANKUKLANGARA, THATHAMPALLY, ALAPPUZHA, PIN-688013 IS SUO MOTU IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER DATED 16/7/19.

¶15

SRI MANU RAJ K.J- GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶16

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 16.07.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶17

WP(C).No.5263 of 2019

¶18

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

The 1^st petitioner was the owner in possession of 15.25 cents and the 2^nd petitioner was the owner in possession of 26.75 cents of land comprised in Survey No.170/17 of Pattanakkad Village of Cherthala Taluk, Alappuzha District, covered by Ext.P1 document No.2101/1991 of the Sub Registrar Office, Pattanakkad. The 1^st and 2^nd petitioners stated to have filed an application dated 28.07.2016 before the 1^st respondent District Collector, as evidenced by Ext.P2 communication dated 04.11.2016 of the said respondent, to regularise the conversion of the aforesaid land, in terms of G.O(P)No.611/2015/RD dated 17.11.2015. During the pendency of that request, the 1^st and 2^nd petitioners sold the property to the 3^rd petitioner, vide Ext.P4 document No.611/2017 dated 20.05.2017. The petitioners have filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the

¶21

WP(C).No.5263 of 2019

¶22

¶23

respondents to communicate the decision reached over their request for alteration of status of property covered by Ext.P1 document No.2101/1191 of Sub Registrar Office, Pattanakkad. The petitioners have also sought for a writ of mandamus commanding the respondents to effect changes in the revenue records, relating to the status of property covered by Exts.P1 and P4 within a time frame.

¶24

On 21.02.2019, when this writ petition came up

¶25

for admission, the learned Government Pleader sought time to get instructions.

¶26

Along with a memo filed by the learned Government Pleader, a report of the Agricultural Officer, who is the Convener of the 2^nd respondent Local Level Monitoring Committee is placed on record. In the said report, the 2^nd respondent Local Level Monitoring Committee has concluded that the property having a total extent of 42 cents covered by Ext.P1 document was converted before the enactment of the Kerala

¶27

WP(C).No.5263 of 2019

¶28

¶29

Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008,

¶30

which can be excluded from the data-bank to be published.

¶31

Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also the learned Government Pleader appearing for the respondent.

¶32

The learned Government Pleader would submit that the request made by the 1^st and 2^nd petitioners is now pending consideration before the additional 3^rd respondent Revenue Divisional Officer and the matter will be taken up for consideration before the said respondent on 18.07.2019.

¶33

The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit that the petitioners shall be personally present before the additional 3^rd respondent on 18.07.2019.

¶34

Having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of, without going into the merits of the case, by directing the additional 3^rd respondent to finalise the

¶35

WP(C).No.5263 of 2019

¶36

¶37

proceedings initiated based on the application dated 28.07.2016 made by the 1^st and 2^nd petitioners, as evidenced by Ext.P2 communication dated 04.11.2016 of the 1^st respondent District Collector, strictly in accordance with law, after conducting a personal hearing on 18.07.2019. The decision taken on that application shall be communicated to the petitioners, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶38

Sd/-

¶39

ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE

¶40

AV/16/7

¶41

WP(C).No.5263 of 2019

¶42

¶43

APPENDIX

¶44

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶45

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE DOCUMENT NUMBER 2101/1991 OF PATTANAKKAD SRO. EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LETTER RECEIVED BY THESE PETITIONERS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DISTRICT COLLECTOR, ALAPPUZHA. EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT OF THIS COURT IN W.P.C.NO.5602 OF 2017 DATED 20.10.2017. EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED GOT REGISTERED BY THE PETITIONERS 1 AND 2 TO THE NAME OF THE 3RD PETITIONER AS DOCUMENT NUMBER 611/2017.

Shamla Krishnan @ Shamla. v. District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shamla Krishnan @ Shamla. v. District Collector

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

D.Parameswaran Nair, Vs Thripunithura Municipality

Shaji S. Vs the District Collector

Shalif Mohammed Nahas Vs the Kochi Muncipal Corporation

Auto Gas Energy (India) Limited Vs Cochin Corporation

M.D.Francis Vs K.M.Ummer

Muhammad Rafeeque Vs Irinjalakuda Municipality