Court directed the Tahsildar and other authorities to address the petitioner's applications regarding re-survey record corrections within three months, afford a hearing, and maintain status quo until the outcome.
Directed 4th respondent Tahsildar to consider petitioner's applications, afford hearing, and dispose of them within three months. Status quo maintained.
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
MONDAY, THE 7TH DAY OF MARCH 2022 / 16TH PHALGUNA, 1943
WP(C) NO. 3529 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
THOMAS M.C., AGED 62 YEARS, S/O LATE CHAKKUNNY, MAIEKKAL HOUSE, KOZHUKKULLI VILLAGE, AYYAPPANKAVU POST, THRISSUR DISTRICT-680751.
BY ADV. P.K.RAVISANKAR
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF SECRETARY, SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695001.
SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY, SR.G.P.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 07.03.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 3529 OF 2022
-2-
JUDGMENT
The singular plea of the petitioner in this
writ petition is that the competent among respondents 4 and 5 be directed to take a decision on his application dated 10.06.2020 - which is numbered as 15387/2020 and is evident from Ext.P3 receipt - through which he is requested that the re-survey records be corrected, because he is in ownership and possession of the property involved in this case.
by the learned Senior Government Pleader – Smt.K.Amminikutty, saying that, as is manifest from Ext.P3, there were two applications and that what is now pending is the one numbered as 15388/2020. She submitted that if the petitioner
only requires the said application to be
WP(C) NO. 3529 OF 2022
-3-
considered, there does not appear to be any legal
impediment in doing so; however, praying that this Court may not make any affirmative declarations in
his favour in this judgment and leave it to the
said Authority to take an apposite decision, as per law.
intervened to say that his client also has a case that since he is in possession of the land in
question, the provisions of the Kerala Land Conservancy Act (the 'Act', for short) cannot be invoked against him. I do not, however, propose to speak on this affirmatively at this stage, since am of the firm view that the competent Authority must first consider his application for correction of re-survey, so that if there is any such action
found warranted, then the controversy can be allayed substantially if not,fully.
Taking note of the afore submissions, I order
WP(C) NO. 3529 OF 2022
-4-
this writ petition and direct the 4th respondent –
Tahsildar (L.R.), to take up application/s of the petitioner - which is/are numbered either as 15387/2020 or 15388/2020 - and dispose it of,
after affording him an opportunity of being heard;
thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
Until such time as the afore exercise is
completed and the resultant order communicated to the petitioner, all further action pursuant to Ext.P4 shall stand deferred; however, making it
clear that further steps thereon can be initiated,
subject to the decision to be taken by the Tahsildar in terms of the afore directions.
As regards the contention of Sri.P.K.Ravi
Sankar – learned counsel for the petitioner,
relating to the 'Act' vis-a-vis the possession of
WP(C) NO. 3529 OF 2022
his client over the property in question is concerned, same is left open to be pursued appropriately, if it becomes so necessary in future.
It is needless to say that status quo with respect to the property in question shall be maintained by both sides, without altering its lie or nature in any manner whatsoever, until the afore exercise is completed and the resultant order communicated to the petitioner.
Sd/DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE
akv
WP(C) NO. 3529 OF 2022
-6-
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 3529/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 19.11.1985 REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO.5376 OF S R O KUTTANELLOOR.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 13.04.2018 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 18.01.2022 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P5 PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER BEFORE DEMOLITION OF THE COMPOUND WALL.
EXHIBIT P5(A) PHOTOGRAPH SHOWING PROPERTY OF THE PETITIONER AFTER DEMOLITION OF THE COMPOUND WALL.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.318 OF 2002 DATED 9/7/2002 OF THE HONOURABLE APEX COURT.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY// P.A. TO JUDGE
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the petitioner should be directed to approach the Tahsildar to correct re-survey records before invoking the Kerala Land Conservancy Act?
Whether the Tahsildar is directed to dispose of the pending application expeditiously within three months?
Whether the status quo regarding the property in question should be maintained pending the re-survey exercise?
Thomas M.C.
State of Kerala
Assistant Executive Engineer, P.W.D. Roads
Assistant Engineer, Town Section, P.W.D.
Tahsildar (L.R.)
Taluk Surveyor
Devan Ramachandran
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
