Disposed

Murugan S v. the State of Kerala

Kerala HC18 Nov 2020WP(C)/18338/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this single paragraph order without reasons, a single Bench of Kerala High Court disposed of a writ petition filed seeking patta assignment after directing the 2nd respondent to consider the applications and records submitted with notice within three months.

What did the court decide?

Directions to the 2nd respondent to consider the submitted application and representation with proper notice and pass appropriate orders within three months.

Murugan S Vs the State of Kerala — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2020)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 18TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2020 / 27TH KARTHIKA, 1942

¶5

WP(C).No.18338 OF 2020(N)

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

MURUGAN S,

¶8

S/O SOMASUNDARA KUMAR, 618, STALIN NAGAR, POONDI, KODAIKKANAL, DINDIGUL, TAMIL NADU, PIN-624 103.

¶9

BY ADV. PRATHEESH PRABHA

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

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

¶12

2 THE TAHSILDAR, THALUK OFFICE, DEVIKULAM, PIN-685 613.

¶13

SRI BIMAL K NATH, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 18.11.2020, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C).No.18338 OF 2020

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

Instant writ petition is filed seeking the following reliefs:

¶19

“i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 2nd respondent to consider Exhibit-P1 and Exhbit-P2 within stipulated time.

¶20

ii) Direct the 2nd respondent to stop all proceedings for assign the land of petitioner’s father.”

¶21

When this writ petition was taken up, the solitary prayer of Sri. Pradeesh Prabha is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to take up Ext.P1 application and Ext.P2 representation submitted seeking issuance of patta and pass appropriate orders.

¶22

Heard the learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Government Pleader.

¶23

Without passing any opinion whatsoever on the merits of the

¶24

claim made by the petitioner in Exts.P1 and P2, this writ petition is

¶25

WP(C).No.18338 OF 2020

¶26

¶27

disposed of directing the 2nd respondent to consider Ext.P1 application with notice to the petitioner and the persons named as respondents in Ext.P2 and take appropriate action in accordance with law. Orders shall be passed as per procedure expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of three

¶28

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶29

The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along

¶30

with the judgment before the 2nd respondent to ensure compliance.

¶31

Sd/-

¶32

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V

¶33

JUDGE

¶34

DSV

¶35

WP(C).No.18338 OF 2020

¶36

¶37

APPENDIX

¶38

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:

¶39

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR ASSIGNMENT ALONG WITH POSTAL RECEIPT SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 8.7.2020

¶40

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 12.8.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER ALONG WITH COURIER RECEIPT

¶41

RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL

¶42

//TRUE COPY//

¶43

P.A TO JUDGE

Murugan S v. the State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Murugan S v. the State of Kerala

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

C.K.Joy Vs National Highway Authority of India

Indus Towers Limited Vs the District Police Chief

Helena T.R. Vs State of Kerala

Praveesh Vs the Registering Authority

Athira Vs Public Prosecutor

Baby Mohanan Vs Station House Officer