This order dismisses the petitioner's challenge to the delay in a suo motu proceeding, directing the second respondent to complete it within twenty-four months instead of the usual eighteen.
Directions issued to the second respondent to complete the suo motu proceedings within twenty-four months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of this judgment.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
FRIDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 24TH POUSHA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 1264 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
ABDUL BASHEER AGED 44 YEARS S/O.THUPPATH BIYYUMMA (LATE), THAYYIL HOUSE, KAVANCHERY, VALAMARUTHUR P.O, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-676 561
BY ADV U.K.DEVIDAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 LAND TRIBUNAL (LAND REFORMS), CIVIL STATION, TIRUR, TIRUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 101
2 SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS), LAND TRIBUNAL,CIVIL STATION, TIRUR, TIRUR P.O., MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679 101
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT. MABLE .C .KURIAN SR.G.P
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 14.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 1264 OF 2022 2
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court
asserting that a suo motu proceedings, bearing S.M.No.2224 of 2021, has been initiated against him
by the 2nd respondent - Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms); and seeks that the same be directed to be
disposed of within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.
Pleader, Smt.Mable C.Kurian, submitted that the afore mentioned suo motu proceedings was initiated against
the petitioner only in January, 2022 and therefore, that this writ petition is premature.
Pleader as afore, it is without doubt that this Court has been ordering suo motu proceedings to be disposed of within a time frame. That said, though this Court
normally fixes eighteen months time for the Competent Authority to complete proceedings, I am of the view that in this case it will be justified to expand it
WP(C) NO. 1264 OF 2022 3
to twenty four months, since the application of the petitioner has been made only very recently.
Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered, directing the 2nd respondent to complete proceedings in S.M.No.2224 of 2021, after following due procedure and after affording necessary opportunity of being heard to the petitioner – as also any other interested person - as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than twenty four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
MC/15.1
WP(C) NO. 1264 OF 2022 4
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1264/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE NO.F 2009 S.R. DATED 05.01.2022 IN SM NO.2224/2021 ISSUED BY THE SECOND RESPONDENT
1 issue framed by the court
Whether a writ petition challenging the delay in disposal of suo motu proceedings initiated by the second respondent is maintainable after a short lapse of time.
ABDUL BASHEER
LAND TRIBUNAL (LAND REFORMS), CIVIL STATION, TIRUR
SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS), LAND TRIBUNAL CIVIL STATION TIRUR
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
