Allowed

Moideen K v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Kerala HC22 Nov 2023WP(C)/1699/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court of Kerala disposed of this writ petition by setting aside a communication cancelling a permit renewal. The Court directed the third respondent to reconsider the application since the property was removed from the data bank, ordering a decision within three weeks.

What did the court decide?

Set aside Ext.P6 communication. Directed the third respondent to reconsider the permit renewal application and pass appropriate orders within three weeks.

Moideen K Vs the Revenue Divisional… — Constitutional and Fundamental Rights | Kerala HC (2023)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM

¶4

WEDNESDAY, THE 22^ND DAY OF NOVEMBER 2023 / 1ST AGRAHAYANA, 1945 WP(C) NO. 1699 OF 2022

¶5

PETITIONERS:

¶6

1 MOIDEEN K AGED 49 YEARS S/O. KOYATHEEN, KONARAMBATH HOUSE, PERUVAYAL P.O., KOZHIKODE-673 008

¶7

2 ABDU RAHMANKUTTY HAJI, S/O.MUHAMMED HAGI, PANDIPARAMBATH HOUSE, PULLAVOOR P.O., CHATHAMANGALAM, KOZHIKODE-673 601 BY ADV SAJEEV KUMAR K.GOPAL

¶8

RESPONDENTS:

¶9

1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER CIVIL STATION JUMA MASJID, SH29, ERANHIPALAM, KOZHIKODE -673 020

¶10

2 THE PERUVAYAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MAVOOR RD, NEAR VARIETY HOTEL, POOVATTUPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE-673 008, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY

¶11

3 THE SECRETARY, PERUVAYAL GRAMA PANCHAYAT, MAVOOR ROAD, NEAR VARIETY HOTEL, POOVATTUPARAMBA, KOZHIKODE-673 008 BY ADVS. T.M.KHALID K.P.SUSMITHA VINOD SINGH CHERIYAN

¶12

OTHER PRESENT:

¶13

GOVERNMENT PLEADER - RIYAL DEVASSY

¶14

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.11.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶15

W.P(C) No.1699 of 2022

¶16

¶17

VIJU ABRAHAM,J

¶18

W.P. (C).No.1699 of 2022

¶19

Dated this the 22^nd day of November, 2023

¶20

JUDGMENT

¶21

The petitioners have approached this Court aggrieved by Ext.P6 communication issued by the third respondent, whereby an order has been issued on the renewal application with a decision to cancel the permit for the reason that the property has been included in the data bank. The petitioners submitted that Form-5 application has been submitted by the petitioners and said application was allowed by Ext.P8 order removing the property from the data bank.

¶22

In view of the above, the writ petition is disposed of as follows:-

¶23

Ext.P6 communication is set aside with a

¶24

¶25

W.P(C) No.1699 of 2022

¶26

consequential direction to the 3^rd respondent to reconsider the application submitted by the petitioners. The only reason stated in Ext.P6 is that the property has been included in the data bank and now the same has been removed from the data bank, the third respondent shall reconsider the application submitted by the petitioners for renewal of permit, in accordance with law, and appropriate orders shall be passed within a outer limit of three weeks from the date of receipt of a copy of the judgment.

¶27

SD/- VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE

¶28

rmm/22/11/2023

¶29

W.P(C) No.1699 of 2022

¶30

¶31

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 1699/2022

¶32

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED DATED
26.5.93 BY WHICH SMT.RAMLA HAD
OBTAINED THE PROPERTY
Exhibit P2TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT IN
RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY ISSUED BY THE
VILLAGE OFFICER, KUTTIKATTUR DATED
27.04.2021

¶33

Exhibit P3TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED
21.05.2014
Exhibit P4TRUE COPY OF THE BUILDING TAX RECEIPT
DATED 27.11.2013 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT

¶34

Exhibit P5TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED
REGARDING THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE
APPLICATION OF THE PETITIONER FORM
THE OFFICE OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT

¶35

Exhibit P6TRUE COPY OF THE COMMUNICATION DATED
04.01.2022 ISSUED BY THE 3RD
RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONERS
Exhibit P7PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING THE ON GOING
CONSTRUCTIONS IN THE PROPERTY OF THE
PETITIONERS
Exhibit P8TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER PASSED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT VIDE NO.C1/6708/2021
DATED 20-07-2022.

Moideen K v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Moideen K v. the Revenue Divisional Officer

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

T.K.Seetharaman Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

Binu K.M. Vs State of Kerala

Cleetus Vs Revenue Divisional Officer, Fort Kochi

Nafeesa .K Vs State of Kerala

Jamal , Vs the Revenue Devisional Officer

Green Meadows Holiday Resorts Private Limited Vs the Thahsildar(Lr)