Allowed

Sushama Siva @ Sushama Siva Prakasham @ Sushama Kumari v. the District Collector

Kerala HC12 Jan 2021WP(C)/511/2021

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this writ petition filed under Article 226, the petitioner sought a direction to the District Collector to dispose of her pending appeal against the notification of land value within a specific time limit. The court directed the 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the appeal expeditiously, with notice to the petitioner and after affording her an opportunity of being heard,

What did the court decide?

The 1st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on the Ext.P2 appeal filed by the petitioner, with notice to the petitioner and after affording her an opportunity of being heard, within a p

Sushama Siva @ Sushama Siva Prakasham @ Sushama Kumari Vs… — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2021)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 12TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 22TH POUSHA, 1942

¶5

W.P.(C) No.511 OF 2021

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

SUSHAMA SIVA @ SUSHAMA SIVA PRAKASHAM @ SUSHAMA KUMARI W/O. SIVA VELU, RESIDING AT NADUVILEDATHU VALIYAVEETTIL, KIZHAKKUMBHAGAM KARA, ETTUMANOOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, KERALA, REPRESENTED BY POWER OF ATTORNEY HOLDER SMT. SAROJINI MENON @ SAROJINIAMMA, AGED 71, HOUSE NO.271 A, VATTAPARMBIL HOUSE, WARD NO.VII OF ETTUMANNOR PANCHAYATH, ETTUMANNOR P. O. - 686631, ETTUMANOOR KARA, ETTUMANOOR VILLAGE, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.

¶8

BY ADVS. SRI.R.LAKSHMI NARAYAN SMT.R.RANJANIE

¶9

RESPONDENT/S:

¶10

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, KUMILY RD, KOTTAYAM - 686002. 2 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOTTAYAM - 686001.

¶11

3 THE TAHSILDAR, FIRST FLOOR, MINI CIVIL STATION, UNION CLUB ROAD, PUTHENANGADY, KOTTAYAM - 686001.

¶12

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ATHIRAMPUZHA, ETTUMANOOR ROAD, ATHIRAMPUZHA, KOTTAYAM - 686562.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SMT K.AMMINIKUTTY -SR. GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 12.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

W.P.(C) No.511 OF 2021

¶17

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner, who is stated to be the owner in possession of property having an extent of 60.70 ares in Athirampuzha Village comprised in Block No.28 of Re-Survey No.157/10, covered by Ext.P1 partition deed bearing No.3603/1 of Ettumannur Sub Registrar Office, has filed this writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of mandamus commanding the 1^st respondent to dispose Ext.P2 appeal filed against the notification of land value under Section 28 A of the Kerala Stamp Act, 1959 within a time frame to be fixed by this Court, after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner through her Power of Attorney Holder or any other authorised representative, after taking into consideration the grounds urged in the Ext.P7 written submission dated 16.11.2020 also and obtaining necessary reports from the concerned respondents.

¶20

On 08.01.2021, when this writ petition came up for admission, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get instructions.

¶21

3 . Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and also the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for respondents 1 to 4.

¶22

4 . The petitioner filed Ext.P2 appeal before the 1 st respondent District Collector, which is one dated 03.01.2020, filed against the notification of land value issued under Section 28 A of the Kerala

¶23

W.P.(C) No.511 OF 2021

¶24

¶25

Stamp Act. The petitioner has also submitted Ext.P7 written submission dated 16.11.2020 before the 1^st respondent.

¶26

The learned Senior Government Pleader would submit that Ext.P2 appeal filed by the petitioner is pending consideration before the 1^st respondent and the said respondent will pass appropriate orders on that application, within a time limit to be fixed by this Court.

¶27

The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the consideration of Ext.P2 appeal along with Ext.P7 written submission may be with notice to the petitioner and after affording her or her authorised representative an opportunity of being heard.

¶28

Having considered the submissions made by learned

¶29

counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of by directing the 1^st respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P2 appeal filed by the petitioner, with notice to the petitioner and after affording the petitioner or her authorised representative an opportunity of being heard, taking note of the contentions raised by the petitioner in Ext.P7 written submission and also that raised at the time of personal hearing, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶30

In State of U.P. v. Harish Chandra [(1996) 9 SCC 309]

¶31

W.P.(C) No.511 OF 2021

¶32

¶33

the Apex Court held that no mandamus can be issued to direct the Government to refrain from enforcing the provisions of law or to do something which is contrary to law. In Bhaskara Rao A.B. v. CBI [(2011) 10 SCC 259] the Apex Court reiterated that, generally, no Court has competence to issue a direction contrary to law nor can the Court direct an authority to act in contravention of the statutory provisions. The courts are meant to enforce the rule of law and not to pass the orders or directions which are contrary to what has been injected by law.

¶34

Therefore, in terms of the direction contained in this judgment, the 1^st respondent shall take an appropriate decision on the matter, strictly in accordance with law, taking note of the relevant statutory provisions and also the law on the point.

¶35

No order as to costs.

Sd/-

JUDGE

MIN

W.P.(C) No.511 OF 2021

¶40

¶41

APPENDIX

¶42

PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

¶43

EXHIBIT P1	THE PHOTOCOPY OF PAR 27.12.1991, BEARING SUB REGISTRY.	TITION DEED, DATED NO.3603/1 OF ETTUMANNUR
EXHIBIT P2	THE PHOTOCOPY OF APP FILED AGAINST THE NO VALUE OF SUBJECT PRO	EAL DATED 3.1.2020 TIFICATION OF LAND PERTY.
EXHIBIT P3	THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE 14.01.2020 ISSUED BY TO THE 3RD RESPONDEN DETAILS AND FURTHER OF DETERMINATION OF	LETTER DATED THE FIRST RESPONDENT T, CALLING FOR THE INPUTS, FOR THE PURPOSE THE APPEAL.
EXHIBIT P4	THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE 12.20.2020 ISSUED BY TO THE 4TH RESPONDEN FURNISH DETAILS REQU	COMMUNICATION DATED THE THIRD RESPONDENT T, CALLING UPON TO IRED IN EXT. P3.
EXHIBIT P5	THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE THE FAIR VALUE, PUBL PROPERTY AS DOWNLOAD WEBSITE.	COMPUTER PRINTOUT OF ISHED FOR THE SUBJECT ED FROM THE GOVERNMENT
EXHIBIT P6	THE PHOTOCOPY OF A R LIE OF SUBJECT PROPE THE MC ROAD AND INTE THE SUBJECT PROPERTY	OUGH SKETCH SHOWING THE RTIES WITH REFERENCE TO RNAL ROADS LEADING TO .
EXHIBIT P7	THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE 16.11.2020 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 1ST RESPO	REPRESENTATION DATED BY THE PETITIONER NDENT.
EXHIBIT P8	THE PHOTOCOPY OF THE EXECUTED BY THE PETI SAROJINI MENON, WHO THIS WRIT PETITION, EMPOWERED BY THE POW	POWER OF ATTORNEY TIONER, IN FAVOUR OF IS THE SIGNATORY IN AS AUTHORIZED AND ER OF ATTORNEY.

Sushama Siva @ Sushama Siva Prakasham @ Sushama Kumari v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sushama Siva @ Sushama Siva Prakasham @ Sushama Kumari v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Mangalam College of Education Vs Mahatma Gandhi University

Benny Sebastian, Vs the District Collector

Sanjai Jimson Vs State of Kerala

Muhammed Rafi C.K Vs Administrator

Beatrise Mary Vs Director of Surveys and Land Records

St. Jacob Training College Vs the Regional Director