Allowed

Subaida, v. Land Tribunal (Devaswom)

Kerala HC4 Jan 2022WP(C)/43/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In WP(C) 43 of 2022, the petitioner challenged a suo motu proceedings initiated against her in 2014. The Court directed the second respondent to complete the proceedings within 12 months, reducing the usual limit, and ensured due procedure and hearing opportunities.

What did the court decide?

Direction to the 2nd respondent to complete S.M.No.416 of 2014 within 12 months following due procedure and hearing.

Subaida, Vs Land Tribunal (Devaswom) — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 4^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 14TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 43 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

SUBAIDA, AGED 52 YEARS

¶8

W/O. HAMZA, KALAKKUNNATHU, ERUMBALASSIRI P.O., EZHUVANTHALA, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD-679335.

¶9

BY ADV R.KRISHNAKUMAR (CHERTHALA)

¶10

RESPONDENTS:

¶11

1 LAND TRIBUNAL (DEVASWOM), CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD-679001.

¶12

2 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (LR), CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD-679001.

¶13

OTHER PRESENT:

¶14

SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY .SR.G.P.

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶16

WP(C) NO. 43 OF 2022

¶17

¶18

J U D G M E N T

¶19

The petitioner has approached this Court asserting that a suo motu proceedings, bearing S.M.No.416 of 2014, has been initiated against her by the 2^nd respondent and seeks that the same be directed to be disposed of within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

¶20

In response, the learned Senior Government Pleader, Smt.Amminikutty, submitted that since the afore mentioned suo motu proceedings was initiated against the petitioner in the year 2014, the competent Authority will consider the same as expeditiously as is possible.

¶21

Even though this Court normally fixes 24 months time to complete proceedings, I am of the view that in this case it will need to be reduced to 12 months, since it has been initiated more than seven year earlier.

¶22

Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered, directing the 2^nd respondent to complete proceedings in S.M.No.416 of 2014, 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 12 months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment.

¶23

Sd/-

¶24

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE

¶25

¶26

WP(C) NO. 43 OF 2022

¶27

¶28

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 43/2022

¶29

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶30

Exhibit P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT NO. KL019040701217/2021 DATED 04/02/2021 ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHERPULASSERI. Exhibit P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED NIL. Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER SUBMITTED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, CHERPULASSERY TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 28/05/2014. Exhibit P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. LR G7 SM NO. 416/2014 DATED 07/06/2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER. Exhibit P5 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 14/03/2018 IN WPC NO.28398/2017 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT.

Subaida, v. Land Tribunal (Devaswom)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Subaida, v. Land Tribunal (Devaswom)

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

Maniyappan Vs State of Kerala

K. Manikandan Vs Renugaj, IAS

Vanditha Mani Nambiar Vs Village Officer

Thomas K.T., Vs the Village Officer

K.P.Kunjikannan, Vs Land Tribunal, Ottappalam

Aysha Beevi Vs the Special Tahsildar