Dismissed

Rejimon Jacob v. Ayarkunnam Grama Panchayat

Kerala HC2 Dec 2022WP(C)/21887/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the Grama Panchayat to complete proceedings on encroachment allegations in vested puzha puramboke using the Taluk Surveyor's report after affording hearing, within two months.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to the 2nd respondent to complete proceedings based on the Taluk Surveyor's report after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioners and 5th respondent within two months.

Rejimon Jacob Vs Ayarkunnam Grama Panchayat — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 2^ND DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 11TH AGRAHAYANA, 1944

¶5

WP(C) NO. 21887 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1 REJIMON JACOB AGED 59 YEARS

¶8

S/O V.K JACOB, RESIDING AT VADDEKUZHIKATTIL, AMAYANOOR P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686019.

¶9

2 O.M IYPE, AGED 63 YEARS

¶10

S/O KORAH MANI, RESIDING AT UDAPANPARAMBIL, AMAYANOOR P.O, KOTTAYAM - 686019.

¶11

BY ADVS. V.HARISH RAJAN VISHNURAJ

¶12

RESPONDENT/S:

¶13

1 AYARKUNNAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM - 686 564, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.

¶14

2 THE SECRETARY, AYARKUNNAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT, AYARKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM - 686 564.

¶15

3 THE TALUK SURVEYOR, KOTTAYAM TALUK OFFICE, KOTTAYAM -686 001.

¶16

4 VILLAGE OFFICER, AYARKUNNNAM VILLAGE, AYARKKUNNAM, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT-- 686 564.

¶17

5 CHANDRAN, S/O PADMANABHAN, PARAPALLIMATTATHIL HOUSE, AMAYNOOR P.O, KOTTAYAM686 019.

¶18

BY ADV UNNI NAMBOODIRI P.M

¶19

BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SMT. SURYA BINOY

¶20

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 02.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶21

WP(C) NO. 21887 OF 2022

¶22

¶23

JUDGMENT

¶24

The petitioners are the residents of the 1^st respondent Panchayat. Alleging that the 5^th respondent has encroached into the 'puzha puramboke' vested in the 1^st respondent Panchayat, the 1^st petitioner has preferred Ext.P4 representation before the 2^nd respondent. Since no action was taken thereon, the petitioners had earlier approached this Court by filing W.P.(c) No.12740/2019 and this Court vide Ext.P6 judgment, directed the 2^nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 representation after hearing the 1^st petitioner and the 5^th respondent, within a time frame. Pursuant to Ext.P6 judgment, the 2^nd respondent passed Ext.P7 stating that further proceedings can be initiated only on receipt of survey report from the 3^rd respondent. Since the 2^nd

¶25

WP(C) NO. 21887 OF 2022

¶26

¶27

respondent has not taken any final decision on Ext.P4 in spite of the direction in Ext.P6 judgment , the petitioner has filed this writ petition for a direction to respondents 1 and 2 to remove the illegal encroachments made by the 5^th respondent in the 'puzha puramboke'.

¶28

When the writ petition came up for further consideration today, the learned Government Pleader, on instructions, submits that the 3^rd respondent has already measured the property and forwarded the report and sketch to the 2^nd respondent.

¶29

Since it is stated in Ext.P7 that final decision can be taken only after getting the actual measurement from the Taluk Surveyor, there will be a direction to the 2^nd respondent to complete the proceedings pursuant to Ext.P7 based on the report of the Taluk Surveyor, after affording an opportunity

¶30

WP(C) NO. 21887 OF 2022

¶31

¶32

of hearing to the petitioners and the 5^th respondent. A decision thereon shall be taken by the 2^nd respondent within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶33

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

¶34

Sd/-

¶35

MURALI PURUSHOTHAMAN

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

al/-

¶38

WP(C) NO. 21887 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 21887/2022

¶41

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶42

Exhibit P1	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED 02.05.2015 ISSUED BY THE ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, KOTTAYAM TO THE SECRETARY OF THE AYARKUNNAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT.
Exhibit P2	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 07.11.1977.
Exhibit P3	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPORT DATED 09.05.2014 OF THE DEPUTY TAHSILDAR, KOTTAYAM.
Exhibit P4	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 23.01.2019 PREFERRED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE SECRETARY, AYARKUNNAM GRAMA PANCHAYAT.
Exhibit P5	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT DATED 24.1.2019 ISSUED BY THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P6	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 07.05.2019 IN WP[C].NO.12740 OF 2019.
Exhibit P7	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.A3-410/18 DATED 25.06.2019 PASSED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P8	A TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 28.04.2022 PREFERRED BY THE PETITIONERS.

Rejimon Jacob v. Ayarkunnam Grama Panchayat

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rejimon Jacob v. Ayarkunnam Grama Panchayat

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

Monison Vs Thazhakkara Grama Panchayat

Prathapan K R., Vs the Tribunal for Local Self Governemnt Institutions

M/S the Kairali Nagar Resident'S Association, Vs the State of Kerala

Usman Shereef, Vs the Secretary

Thrissur District Citizen Cooperative Society Ltd. Vs State of Kerala

Subhash Gopalakrishnan Vs Tripunithura Muncipality