Disposed

Philip v. the District Collector

Kerala HC17 Jan 2022WP(C)/693/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala directed the Special Thahsidar to enquire into the genuineness of the petitioner’s Patta and issue a certificate without issuing an affirmative order, setting a two-month deadline.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 2nd respondent to take up the petitioner's Ext.P4 representation, make an enquiry after hearing interested parties, and dispose of it within two months; 2nd respondent to transmit file to

Philip Vs the District Collector — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

MONDAY, THE 17^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 27TH POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 693 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

PHILIP S/O. JOSEPH, VEZHAKOMBIL, SOFFIRIN VILLA, KATTAPPANA. P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT, PIN-685 508

¶8

BY ADV O.D.SIVADAS

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL STATION, PAINAVU, IDUKKI-673 001

¶11

2 THE SPECIAL THAHSILDAR, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, CIVIL STATION, KATTAPPANA, IDUKKI DISTRICT,PIN-685 508

¶12

3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KATTAPPANA VILLAGE OFFICE, KATTAPPANA, IDUKKI DISTRICT,PIN-685 508

¶13

SMT.M.ANIMA.G.P.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 17.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO. 693 OF 2022

¶16

¶17

JUDGMENT

¶18

The limited relief sought for by the

¶19

petitioner in this writ petition is that respondents 1 to 3, or the competent among them, be directed to take up Ext.P4 request made by him and to issue a certificate with

¶20

respect to the genuineness of Ext.P1 “Patta”.

¶21

The afore request of Sri.O.D.Sivadas –

¶22

learned counsel for the petitioner, was answered by Smt.M.Anima – learned Government Pleader, saying that genuineness of Ext.P1 “Patta” cannot be certified without a proper enquiry and therefore, that if this Court is so inclined, then said Authority may be allowed liberty to make a proper enquiry with respect to the same, after hearing all sides.

¶23

When I consider the afore submissions, it is without doubt that the competent among respondents 1 to 3 have been approached by the

¶24

WP(C) NO. 693 OF 2022

¶25

¶26

petitioner through Ext.P4 seeking a certificate that Ext.P1 “Patta” enjoyed by him is genuine. This certainly is a process that will have to be completed by the competent Tahsildar and I am certain that this Court cannot issue affirmative orders.

¶27

In the afore circumstances, I order this writ petition and direct the 2^nd respondent to take up Ext.P4 representation of the petitioner and dispose it of, after making all enquiries and after affording him an opportunity of being

¶28

heard, or to anyone else, who may be interested; thus culminating in an appropriate order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later than two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.

¶29

I make it clear that if the competent

¶30

Authority is not the 2^nd respondent, but the Tahsildar (Land Records) or such other, then

¶31

WP(C) NO. 693 OF 2022

¶32

¶33

said respondent will transmit Ext.P4 to that Authority within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment, so that necessary action in terms of the afore directions can be completed within the afore time frame.

¶34

At this time, Sri.O.D.Sivadas intervened to say that there cannot be a question regarding the genuineness of Ext.P1 “Patta” because Exts.P2 and P3 tax receipts would show that it has been accepted and that his client was allowed to remit land tax on the property covered by it. Obviously, therefore, while completing the afore exercise, the competent Authority will also advert to these tax receipts, in terms of law.

¶35

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶36

JUDGE

¶37

SAS/17/01/2022

¶38

WP(C) NO. 693 OF 2022

¶39

¶40

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 693/2022

¶41

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

¶42

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE PATTA ISSUED BY SPECIAL THASILDAR ON 15.05.1979 TO THE PETITIONER Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT FOR THE PERIOD 2021-2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PORTION OF BASIS TAX REGISTER IN RELATION TO THE PETITIONERS PROPERTY OBTAINED UNDER RTI ACT Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED 24.06.2021 Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 18.10.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT

Philip v. the District Collector

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Philip 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

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

P.K. Krishnakumar Vs the Chief Engineer

Pushpalatha S Jain Vs the District Collector

Abdul Basheer Vs Land Tribunal

Leela A.P Vs State of Kerala

T.Venugopal Vs State of Kerala

Varghese Chacko, Vs the District Collector