Allowed

Rasiya v. the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms)

Kerala HC11 Jan 2022WP(C)/735/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This High Court entertained a writ petition challenging the initiation of suo motu proceedings in December 2021 against the petitioner. The Court dismissed the argument of prematurity and directed the First Respondent to complete the proceedings within twenty-four months, ensuring the petitioner's right to be heard.

What did the court decide?

Directed the 1st Respondent to dispose of S.M.No.2212 of 2021 within twenty-four months, following due procedure and affording necessary opportunity of hearing.

Rasiya Vs the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) — Writ and Judicial Review | Kerala HC (2022)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶4

TUESDAY, THE 11^TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 21ST POUSHA, 1943

¶5

WP(C) NO. 735 OF 2022

¶6

PETITIONER:

¶7

RASIYA AGED 56 YEARS D/O.MOIDHEENKUTTY, KUNNATHEDATH HOUSE, PONMUNDAM POST, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, PIN - 676 106.

¶8

BY ADVS. BINU V V VEETTIL VALAPPIL S.K.PREMJITH MENON

¶9

RESPONDENTS:

¶10

1 THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS) OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LR), THE LAND TRIBUNAL, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 106.

¶11

2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER KALPAKANCHERY VILLAGE OFFICE, KALPAKANCHERY, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT - 676 551.

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

SMT.K.AMMINIKUTTY SR.G.P.

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 11.01.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

WP(C) NO. 735 OF 2022 2

¶16

JUDGMENT

¶17

The petitioner has approached this Court

¶18

asserting that a suo motu proceedings, bearing S.M.No.2212 of 2021, has been initiated against her by the 1^st respondent - Special Tahsildar (Land

¶19

Reforms); 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

¶21

Pleader, Smt.K.Amminikutty, submitted that the afore mentioned suo motu proceedings was initiated against the petitioner only in December, 2021 and therefore,

¶22

that this writ petition is premature.

¶23

When I hear the learned Senior Government

¶24

Pleader as afore, it is without doubt that this Court

¶25

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 to twenty four months, since the application of the petitioner has been made only very recently.

¶26

WP(C) NO. 735 OF 2022 3

¶27

Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered, directing the 1^st respondent to complete proceedings in S.M.No.2212 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.

¶28

Sd/-

¶29

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

¶30

JUDGE

¶31

MC/11.1

¶32

WP(C) NO. 735 OF 2022 4

¶33

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 735/2022

¶34

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

¶35

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 29.12.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Rasiya v. the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms)

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rasiya v. the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms)

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

1. Elsy Vs 1. the Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms), Land Tribunal, Tripunithura

Palakkodan Tharayil Ibrahim Kutty Vs Special Deputy Collector La NHAI

Kuttiyamu Haji Vs The Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms)

Shyam Varkey Sebastian Vs Union Bank of India

P.P.Devi Vs the Village Officer

Sasikumar, Vs Special Tahsildar (L.R.)