WP(C) No.2419/2019 1/7
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR.S.MANIKUMAR
&
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
Friday, the 24th day of June 2022 / 3rd Ashadha, 1944
WP(C) NO. 2419 OF 2019(B)
PETITIONER:
BALA RAVANAN AGED 40 YEARS S/O. LATE BALAN, SREELANKAPURI,
CHERUNNIYOOR P.O., CHERUNNIYOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM
DISTRICT.
RESPONDENTS:
1. THE KERALA LOK AYUKTA LEGISLATURE COMPLEX, VIKAS BHAVAN P.O.,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 33.
2. THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, COLLECTORATE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 005.
3. THE TAHSILDAR, THE TALUK OFFICE, VARKALA TALUK, VARKALA VILLAGE 695
141.
4. ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR, THE TALUK OFFICE, VARKALA 695 141.
5. THE VILLAGE OFFICER, MANAMPOOR VILLAGE, VILLAGE OFFICE, MANAMPOOR,
VARKALA TALUK, 695 144
6. JINCY JALEEL, D/O. ABDUL JALEEL, RESIDING AT OASIS, THOTTAKKADU,
MANAM BOOR VILLAGE 695 144.
7. JASIM ABDUL SALAM, AGED 38 YEARS S/O. ABDUL SALAM, M.S. VILLA,
MUDIYAKKODU DESOM, CHERUNNIYOOR VILLAGE, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT
695 144.
Writ petition (civil) praying inter alia that in the circumstances
stated in the affidavit filed along with the WP(C) the High Court be
pleased to stay all further proceedings pursuant to Exhibit P6 order
pending disposal of the above Writ Petition in the interest of justice.
This petition again coming on for orders upon perusing the petition
and the affidavit filed in support of WP(C) and this Court's order dated
28-01-2019 and upon hearing the arguments of M/S. M.R.ANANDAKUTTAN,
M.A.ZOHRA, MAHESH ANANDAKUTTAN, V.K.ANJU, C.P.ABHILASH, Advocates for the
petitioners, GOVERNMENT PLEADER for R2 to R5, SRI.M.R.RAJESH, Advocate for
R6, the court passed the following:
WP(C) No.2419/2019 2/7
S. MANIKUMAR, C. J. & SHAJI P. CHALY, J.
======================================
W. P. (C) No. 2419 of 2019
======================================
Dated this the 24th day of June, 2022
ORDER
S. Manikumar, C. J.
Being aggrieved by the directions issued by the Kerala Upa Lok Ayukta in Complaint No. 989 of 2017 dated 25.08.2017, instant writ petition is filed.
2. Short facts leading to the filing of the writ petition are as hereunder:-
a) According to the petitioner, he purchased 1 acre of land vide Sale Deed No. 942/1993 and is in possession and enjoyment of the same; and has effected mutation vide issuance of Thandaper No. 8957 and is paying revenue for the same.
b) Petitioner has submitted that Mrs. Jincy Jaleel, the 6 th respondent, and her parents attempted to trespass into 92 cents of the said property on the basis of the errors crept into in the re-survey records, which is caused by false misrepresentation, and further WP(C) No.2419/2019 3/7 W. P. (C) No. 2419 of 2019 -2- creation of documents by incorporating the said extent into title deeds, and hence, civil suit was filed as O.S. No. 64 of 2013 by the petitioner; and a declaratory decree that the property belongs to the petitioner, based on the title deed, is granted; further to which necessary corrections were made and documents issued accordingly, relating to possession and demarcation of the property covered under his title deed, and corrected in the Village records.
c) Petitioner has further submitted that contending the same to be by way of maladministration, the father of the defendant in the suit, who has created the entire mischief, has filed a complaint as the power of attorney of the said daughter's husband Mr. Jasim Abdul Salam, the 7th respondent herein, before the Kerala Lok Ayukta, the 1 st respondent, contending that he is victimized by the said proceedings, though he is not a party to the civil suit.
d) Petitioner has contended that the 7th respondent has no right over the said property. But the 1 st respondent, without realizing and considering these aspects as well as the written objection filed by the petitioner and respondents 2 to 4 herein, who are the respondents 1 to 3 WP(C) No.2419/2019 4/7 W. P. (C) No. 2419 of 2019 -3- in Ext. P3 complaint No. 989 of 2017 lodged with false allegation, has wrongly passed Ext. P6 order, exceeding the jurisdiction and powers vested in it in a matter seized in civil disputes, which attained finality at the time of issuance of the documents produced along with Ext.P4, which is proper and legally correct and in implementation of the civil decree, by accepting the false contentions.
e)It is further contended that Ext.P6 order is totally incorrect, and the Regular First Appeal is pending consideration of this Court, and further issues, if any, is to be decided by this Court.
3. Being aggrieved, instant writ petition is filed.
4. Record of proceedings shows that as early as on 28.01.2019, this Court ordered thus:-
"The petitioner was the 5th respondent in the complaint No.989/2017 filed before the Kerala Lok Ayukta by one Jasim Abdul Salam and the challenge here is to the order dated 25.08.2017 (Ext.P6) of the Lok Ayukta, whereby an interim order was passed to the Kerala State Financial Enterprises (KSFE) Limited to not to grant any loan to the present petitioner, on the basis of security of any portion of the property comprised in Re.Sy.No.305/7.
WP(C) No.2419/2019 5/7
W. P. (C) No. 2419 of 2019
-4-
2. Smt.M.A.Zohra, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner's title over the property in question was determined through the judgment dated 09.11.2016 (Ext.P1) of the Sub Judge, Attingal in the O.S.No.64/2013. Moreover, the loan was obtained by the petitioner much before the interim order was passed by the Lok Ayukta on 25.08.2017 and the loan dues have since been liquidated to the KSFE Limited, by the borrower. However since the petitioner is subjected to periodical harassment by the Manager of the KSFE Limited, on account of the interim order passed by the Lok Ayukta on 25.08.2017 (Ext.P6), the aggrieved party is constrained to move the High Court.
3. In view of the above projection, let notice before admission be issued. The learned Government Advocate Sri.Tek Chand accepts notice for respondents 2, 3, 4 and 5. Steps be taken to serve notice by speed post to respondents 6 and 7.
4. The Government Advocate to receive instruction on the updated proceedings before the Lok Ayukta, in pursuant to the last order dated 25.08.2017 (Ext.P6)."
5. Respondent No. 7 is stated to be the contesting respondent.
Notice sent to the 7th respondent has been returned with the endorsement 'not known'.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner is permitted to take notice WP(C) No.2419/2019 6/7 W. P. (C) No. 2419 of 2019 -5- on the 7th respondent by Special Messenger, returnable in one week.
Post on 01.07.2022.
Sd/-
S. MANIKUMAR CHIEF JUSTICE Sd/-
SHAJI P. CHALY
JUDGE
Eb
24-06-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar
WP(C) No.2419/2019 7/7
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 2419/2019
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE 1ST RESPONDENT DATED
25.8.2017 IN COMPLAINT NO. 989/2017-C
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT FILED BY THE 7TH RESPONDENT
BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT LOK AYUKTA AS COMPLAINT EXHIBIT P4 NO.989/2017 EXHIBIT 1 TRUE COPY OF THE STATMENT WITH RELEVANT DOCUMENTS FILED BY THE RESPONDENTS 3 TO 5.
TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN OS 64/2013 DATED 09.11.2016 OF THE SUBCOURT ATTINGAL