IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 3RD ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022
PETITIONERS:
1 ADV. D. SARACHANDRA DAS
AGED 64 YEARS
S/O DAMODARAN UNNITHAN, PUTHUPARAMBIL VEETTIL,
PRAMADOM VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERY TALUK,
KUMBAZHA P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689653
2 P.R PRABHA KUMARI
AGED 55 YEARS
W/O ADV. D. SARACHANDRA DAS, PUTHUPARAMBIL VEETTIL,
PRAMADOM VILLAGE, KOZHENCHERY TALUK,
KUMBAZHA P.O, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689653
BY ADVS.
MANU RAMACHANDRAN
M.KIRANLAL
R.RAJESH (VARKALA)
T.S.SARATH
SAMEER M NAIR
GEETHU KRISHNAN
HARSHA SUSAN SAM
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF RDO,
ADOOR REVENUE DIVISION, ADOOR P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT, PIN - 691 523
2 THE TAHASILDAR (LAND REVENUE)
KOZHENCHERRY TALUK,
PATHANAMTHITTA P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 645
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN,
PATHANAMTHITTA P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689 645
WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022
2
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
PATHANAMTHITTA P.O, PIN - 689645
5 THE SECRETARY
PATHANAMTHITTA MUNICIPALITY,
PATHANAMTHITTA P.O,
PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT - 689645
BY ADVS.
SRI.S.RANJITH,SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER
SHRI.V.K.SUNIL, SC, PATHANAMTHITTA
MUNICIPALITY
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 24.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022
3
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
------------------------------
W.P.(C).No. 9736 of 2022
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 24th day of June, 2022
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with the following prayers:
"(1) To call for records leading to Exhibit P8 order and quash the same by issuing a writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ or order, in the interest of justice.
(2) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ, order or direction to the 1st respondent for expeditious reconsideration of applications of the petitioners which culminated in Ext.P3 and Ext.P6 at the earliest in terms of CI.6(2) of KLU Order and in compliance with the direction contained in Exhibit P7 judgment, within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble Court;
(3) Issue such other orders or directions which deems necessary for the ends of justice and in the circumstances of the case."[SIC]
2. This Court as per Ext.P7 judgment directed the 1st respondent to take up consider and pass orders WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022 4 on the application preferred by the petitioners in terms of Kerala Land Utilization Order. The grievance of the petitioner is that the same is violated and an order is passed by the RDO flouting the directions in the judgment passed by this Court.
3. Heard counsel appearing for the petitioner and the learned Government Pleader. I also heard the counsel appearing for the Municipality.
4. The counsel appearing for the petitioner takes me through Ext.P7 judgment passed by this Court and thereafter Ext.P8 order passed by the 1 st respondent. It will be better to extract the relevant portion of Ext.P7 judgment.
"Having considered the contentions advanced and having heard the parties, in view of the admitted position that the application initially preferred by the petitioners was before the amendment to the 2008 Act with effect from 13.12.2017 and in view of the fact that orders have already been rendered by the LLMC and the property stands removed from the data bank, I am of the opinion that the application preferred by the petitioners before the RDO under the provisions of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order requires a WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022 5 consideration, in accordance with law. In the above view of the matter, there will be a direction to the respondents to take up, consider and pass orders on the applications preferred by the petitioners before the RDO in terms of the Kerala Land Utilisation Order and after considering all relevant aspects of the matter.
Appropriate orders shall be passed within a period of two months from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
This writ petition is ordered accordingly. "
5. Thereafter Ext.P8 order is passed by the 1 st respondent. The relevant portion of Ext.P8 order is extracted hereunder:
"ആയതതിനനാൽ അപപേക്ഷകപന്റേയയും ടതിയനാനന്റേ ഭനാരര്യയനടയയും പപേരതിൽ പേത്തനയുംതതിട്ട വതിപല്ലേജതിൽ , സർപവ്വേ K-56/4A2, K- 58/4C, K-58/1-2 എനന്നീ നമ്പറുകളതിലുള്ള ഭൂമതിയനട തരയും പുരയതിടനമനന്ന് പചേർത്തു നൽകുവനാൻ പകരള ഭൂവതിനപയനാഗ ഉത്തരവതിനലെ പകനാസന്ന് 6(2) പ്രകനാരയും വര്യവസ്ഥ ഇല്ലേനാത്തതതിനനാൽ ടതിയനാനന്റേ ഇതതിപലെക്കുള്ള അപപേക്ഷ നതിരസതിചന്ന് ഉത്തരവനാകുന.
സൂചേന (4) പ്രകനാരയും സമർപതിക്കനപട്ടതിട്ടുള്ള അപപേക്ഷയതിപന്മേൽ തുടർ നടപേടതികൾ സസന്നീകരതിചന്ന് തന്നീർപ്പുണനാക്കുനതതിപലെക്കന്ന് പരഖനാമൂലെയും അപപേക്ഷതിക്കുന സനാഹചേരര്യത്തതിൽ പകരളനാ നനൽവയൽ തണന്നീർത്തട സയുംരക്ഷണ (പഭതഗതതി) നതിയമയും 2018 നലെ വര്യവസ്ഥകൾക്കു വതിപധേയമനായതി WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022 6 തന്നീർപ്പുണനാക്കുനതുമനാണന്ന് . ഇപ്രകനാരയും ബഹ. പകരള ഹഹപക്കനാടതതിയനട WP(C)13862/2021 നമ്പർ പകസതിപന്മേൽ 01.10.2021 ൽ ഉണനായതിട്ടുള്ള വതിധേതി നടപനാക്കതിയതിട്ടുള്ളതുമനാണന്ന് ."
6. I am dissatisfied the way in which the 1 st respondent passed the order when there is a direction from this Court in Ext.P7 judgment. If there is any grievance against Ext.P8, there are remedies available in law. Without resorting to such remedies, the 1 st respondent ought not to have passed Ext.P8 order. I am of the view that Ext.P8 is an order passed in violation of the direction of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment. I do not want to take any action against the 1st respondent considering the facts and circumstances of the case. There can be a direction to the 1 st respondent to reconsider the matter in accordance to law.
Therefore this writ petition is allowed in the following manner:
i. Ext.P8 is set aside.
WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022
7
ii. The 1st respondent is directed to reconsider
the matter based on the application submitted by the petitioner as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
iii. The 1st respondent will obey the directions of this Court in Ext.P7 judgment, as long as the same is not varied or modified.
iv. Based on the decision taken by the 1st respondent, the petitioner is free to submit an application as per the Kerala Land Tax Act and appropriate orders will be passed by the competent authority in accordance to law.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN DM JUDGE WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022 8 APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9736/2022 PETITIONER EXHIBITS EXHIBIT P1 THE TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT IN THANDAPER NO.27244 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT VILLAGE OFFICER IN FAVOUR OF PETITIONERS 1 & 2 DATED 08.06.2020 .
EXHIBIT P2 THE APPLICATION PREFERRED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT DATED 15.11.2016 EXHIBIT P3 THE TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY VIDE NO.
977/2017/KDIS/B4 DATED 10.03.2017 ISSUED BY THE RDO, ADOOR TO THE PETITIONERS EXHIBIT P4 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF 2ND RESPONDENT TO 4TH RESPONDENT DATED 05.01.2018 ANNEXED WITH THE DECISION NO.1 DATED 01.03.2017 OF THE LLMC EXHIBIT P5 THE TRUE COPY OF THE ERRATUM NOTIFICATION NO.321 DATED 09.02.2018 IN KERALA GAZETTE EXHIBIT P6 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.84/977/2017 DATED 24.04.2017 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT-RDO TO 3RD RESPONDENT EXHIBIT P7 THE TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 01.10.2021 IN WP(C) NO.13862/2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT EXHIBIT P8 THE TRUE COPIES OF THE ORDER VIDE.
NO. 977/2017/B6 DATED 01.01.2022 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT- RDO EXHIBIT P9 THE TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 01.01.2022 PREFERRED BY THE WP(C) NO. 9736 OF 2022 9 PETITIONERS BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT-RDO RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS : NIL //TRUE COPY// PA TO JUDGE