Disposed

K.G.Suresh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Kerala HC19 Jul 2024WP(C)/25868/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Court directed the designated officer to consider the petitioners' Form 5 application to remove land from the data bank after obtaining a report from the Agricultural Officer, and subsequently consider the Form 6 tenure change application upon allowance of the former.

What did the court decide?

Direction issued to consider Form 5 application within two months of report and Form 6 within three months thereafter if Form 5 is allowed.

K.G.Suresh Kumar Vs State of Kerala — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.M.MANOJ

¶4

FRIDAY, THE 19TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 28TH ASHADHA, 1946

¶5

WP(C) NO. 25868 OF 2024

¶6

PETITIONER/S:

¶7

1K.G.SURESH KUMAR
AGED 49 YEARS
S/O.K.V GOPALAN NAIR KANGATTU VEETIL, PERAPPURE,
ARANMULA P.O., PATHANAMTHIRRA, PIN - 689553

¶8

2 JYOTHI SURESH AGED 43 YEARS W/O.SURESH KANGATTU VEETIL, PERAPPURE, ARANMULA P.O., PATHANAMTHIRRA, PIN - 689533

¶9

BY ADVS.
K.J.MANU RAJ
K.VINAYA

¶10

RESPONDENT/S:

¶11

1 STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695001

¶12

2 REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR, MINI CIVIL STATION, ADOOR PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 686520

¶13

3 THE TAHSILDAR(LR), KOZHENCHERY TALUK, KOZHENCHERY, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689641

¶14

4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MALLAPUZHACHERRY VILLAGE, MALLAPUZHACHERRY PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689644

¶15

5 AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN MALLAPUZHACHERRY PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689644

¶16

6 DEPUTY COLLECTOR (REVENUE RECOVERY), CIVIL STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN – 689645 SMT. AMMINIKUTTY K., SR.GP

¶17

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
19.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:

¶18

WP(C) NO. 25868 OF 2024

¶19

JUDGMENT

¶20

This writ petition is filed aggrieved by the non consideration of Form 5 application, produced as Ext.P8.

¶21

It is stated that petitioners purchased 13.35 Ares of property lying in Sy.No.177/7 of Block 12 of Mallapuzhacherry Village in Kozhencherry Taluk, Pathanamthitta District. The learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that the tenure of the said land is dry land and it is a residential plot, as evident from Ext.P1 photograph. Even then, the property is included in the data bank. In that event, the petitioners approached the 1^st respondent by preferring Ext.P8 application dated 12.06.2024 for removing the property from the Data Bank. The petitioners had also submitted Form 6 application, produced as Ext.P7, for changing the tenure of the property in Revenue Records.

¶22

I have heard Sri.K.J.Manuraj, the learned Counsel appearing for the petitioners and the learned Senior Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶23

It is submitted by the learned Counsel for the petitioners that, initially, the petitioners approached the 1^st respondent with

¶24

WP(C) NO. 25868 OF 2024

¶25

Form 6 application produced as Ext.P7. In that event, the petitioners were directed to prefer Form 5 application to get the property removed from the data bank. Accordingly, Ext.P8 application was preferred on 12.06.2024, before the designated officer, which is pending consideration. The petitioners seek disposal of both Exts.P7 and P8 applications, within a stipulated period.

¶26

On consideration of the limited nature of the prayer sought for in the writ petition, I am of the considered opinion that the designated officer under the statutory provisions shall be directed to consider Ext.P8 application in Form 5 after obtaining a report from the 5^th respondent Agricultural Officer. Thereafter, in the event of allowing Ext.P8, the 2^nd respondent shall consider and pass orders on Ext.P7. Accordingly, there will be a direction to the Agricultural Officer to submit a report with respect to the property mentioned above, within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. In the event of receipt of the said report from the 5^th respondent, the 6^th respondent shall consider and pass orders on Exts.P8 within a period of two months thereafter. In the event of allowing the prayer in Ext.P8 petition, the 2^nd respondent is directed

¶27

WP(C) NO. 25868 OF 2024

¶28

-4-

¶29

to consider and pass orders on Ext.P7 application after complying

¶30

due formalities within a further period of three months thereafter.

¶31

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

¶32

Sd/-

¶33

P.M.MANOJ
JUDGE

¶34

¶35

20.07.2024

¶36

WP(C) NO. 25868 OF 2024

¶37

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 25868/2024

¶38

PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P 1A TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPH OF THE
PROPERTY
Exhibit P 2A TRUE COPY OF THE REGISTERED DOCUMENT
DATED 11.5.2007

¶39

Exhibit P 3A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER DATED
9.4.2024

¶40

Exhibit P 4A TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION
CERTIFICATE DATED 16.3.2022
Exhibit P 5A TRUE COPY OF THE SKETCH OF THE
PROPERTY IN SY NO. 177/7 OF BLOCK NO.
12 MALLAPUZHACHERRY VILLAGE
Exhibit P 6A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF
DATA BANK
Exhibit P 7A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION IN FORM
6 DATED 17.3.2022 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONERS TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT
Exhibit P 7 [ a ]A TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY
THE REVENUE DEPARTMENT DATED 17.3.2022
Exhibit P 8A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 APPLICATION
DATED 12.6.2024
Exhibit P 8 [ a ]A TRUE COPY OF THE FORM 5 RECEIPT DATED
12.6.2024

K.G.Suresh Kumar v. State of Kerala

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

K.G.Suresh Kumar v. State of Kerala

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.J.Mathew Vs Registrar of Co-Operative Societies of Kerala

Lalu T.C Vs Avanur Grama Panchayat

P.T.Sreenivasan Vs State of Kerala

Jenson Vs State of Kerala

Jabir V.B Vs the Revenue Divisional Officer

P.V. Thomas Vs the Secretary Agricultural Department