Allowed

Sivan v. the Village Officer Athirapilly

Kerala HC17 Jul 2024WP(C)/39082/2023

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Writ petition regarding mutation of 30.37 Ares of forest land. Petitioner held patta but was refused mutation due to alleged stay order in another case. Court directed revenue officials to ignore the alleged stay and complete mutation.

What did the court decide?

Respondent Nos.1 and 2 directed to mutate the property covered by Ext.P1 patta in favour of the petitioner and receive tax within one month.

Sivan Vs the Village Officer Athirapilly — Land Acquisition | Kerala HC (2024)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

¶2

PRESENT

¶3

THE HONOURABLE DR. JUSTICE KAUSER EDAPPAGATH
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF JULY 2024 / 26TH ASHADHA, 1946

¶4

WP(C) NO. 39082 OF 2023

¶5

PETITIONER:

¶6

SIVAN
AGED 57 YEARS
S/O LATE PAAPPU, KAATTUPARAMBIL HOUSE,
KANNAMKUZHI BHAGOM, ATHIRAPILLY VILLAGE,
VETTILAPARA P.O, CHALAKUDY TALUK, THRISSUR
DISTRICT, PIN - 680721
BY ADVS.
SIRAJ K. H.
MOHAMMED SHAD K.A.

¶7

RESPONDENTS:

¶8

1 THE VILLAGE OFFICER ATHIRAPILLY VILLAGE OFFICE ATHIRAPILLY, CHALAKUDY TALUKTHRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680724

¶9

2 THE TAHSILDAR ( LAND RECORDS) CHALAKUDY TALUK, TALUK OFFICE CHALAKUDY , THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680307

¶10

3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, IRIJNALAKUDA REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, IRINJALAKUDA, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680121

¶11

4 SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (FOREST LAND ASSIGNMENT OFFICE) L A UNIT NO 1, COLLECTORATE, AYYANTHOL, THRISSUR, PIN - 680002

¶12

5 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR CIVIL STATION, CIVIL LINES ROAD, KALYAN NAGAR, AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR DISTRICT, PIN - 680003

¶13

BY ADV

¶14

SRI. RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE – GOVERNMENT PLEADER

¶15

THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 17.07.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:

¶16

¶17

W.P.(C) NO.39082 OF 2023

¶18

JUDGMENT

¶19

The petitioner is the owner in possession of 30.37 Ares of land by virtue of Ext.P1 Patta issued under the provisions of the Kerala Land Assignment (Regularisation of Occupations of Forest Lands Prior to 01.01.1977) Special Rules, 1993. When he approached the first respondent to mutate the property based on Ext.P1 patta, the first respondent refused to do the same stating that there is a stay order in respect of the same property passed by this Court in W.P.(C) No.19472/2022. According to the petitioner, the property covered by the said Writ Petition is a totally different property. It is in these circumstances, the petitioner has approached this Court.

¶20

I have heard Sri. Siraj K. H. the learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri. Rajeev Jyothish George, the learned Government Pleader for the respondents.

¶21

The fourth respondent has filed a detailed statement along with a sketch. In paragraph 5 of the counter

¶22

¶23

W.P.(C) NO.39082 OF 2023

¶24

statement, it is stated that the property involved in this case and the property involved in W. P. (C) No.19472/2022 is totally different. It is also stated that the petitioner is in possession of the land covered by Ext.P1 patta. Hence, the respondent Nos.1 and 2 are directed to mutate the property covered by Ext.P1 patta in favour of the petitioner, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment and receive tax from him.

¶25

Writ Petition is allowed as above.

¶26

Sd/-

¶27

DR. KAUSER EDAPPAGATH

JUDGE

W.P.(C) NO.39082 OF 2023

¶32

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 39082/2023

¶33

PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1TRUE COPY OF THE PATTA (ASSIGNMENT DEED)
ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT DATED
16.08.2022
EXHIBIT P2TRUE COPY OF THE PHOTOGRAPHS SHOWING HIS
ABODE AND ITS SURROUNDINGS DATED NIL
EXHIBIT P3TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN W.P (C)
4150/2022 FILED BY THE PETITIONER DATED
29.03.2022
EXHIBIT P4TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER ISSUED BY THE 4TH
RESPONDENTAGAINSTTHEPRIVATE
RESPONDENTS DATED 04.06.2022
EXHIBIT P5TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE
1ST RESPONDENT DATED 25.10.2022
EXHIBIT P6TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST MADE BY THE
PETITIONER DATED 30.10.2023

¶34

RESPONDENTS’ EXHIBITS: NIL

Sivan v. the Village Officer Athirapilly

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Sivan v. the Village Officer Athirapilly

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

Ramani Vs District Collector

Kaniyath Kanakarajan Vs the District Collector

Shajan.K. Vs State of Kerala

Usha Parameswaran Vs the District Collector

Odungattu Naser Vs State of Kerala

Abdul Kareem Vs State of Kerala