Kerala High Court
Kumari S vs The Tahasildar (Land Records) on 10 February, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2021 / 21ST MAGHA,1942
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
PETITIONER/S:
1 KUMARI S.
AGED 53 YEARS
D/O.SAROJINI,NELLIVILAVEEDU,ARR SCHOOL
ROAD,NELLIVILA,NETTAYOM.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695013.
2 RAJANI,
AGED 46 YEARS
D/O.SAROJINI,NELLIVILA VEEDU,
ARR SCHOOL ROAD,
NELLIVILA,NETTAYOM.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695013.
BY ADV. SRI.THIRUMALA P.K.MANI
RESPONDENT/S:
1 THE TAHASILDAR (LAND RECORDS)
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK OFFICE,
TALUK OFFICE RD, NEAR EXCISE OFFICER,
FORT,EAST FORT,PAZHAVANGADI,
ATTAKULANGARA P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM,KERALA-695023.
2 THE TALUK SURVEYOR,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM TALUK,SURVEY BHAVAN,
COTTON HILL RD,COTTON HILL,VAZHUTHACAUD,
P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
PEROORKADA VILLAGE,NERA CPT,VATTIYOORKAVU,P.O,
MARUTHANKUZHI-KACHANI ROAD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695013.
4 THE SENIOR SUPERINTENDENT,
SURVEY DIRECTORATE,SURVEY BHAVAN,COTTON HILL
ROAD,COTTON HILL,VAZHUTHACAUD,.P.O,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
2
5 DEPUTY DIRECTOR,
DEPARTMENT OF SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS,
OFFICE OF THE SURVEY DIRECTOR VAZHUTHACAUD,
P.O.THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695014.
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT A.C.VIDHYA - GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 10.02.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
3
JUDGMENT
The petitioners' father was the absolute owner in
possession of 20 cents of property comprised in old Survey
No.2462/118-1-2 in Peroorkada Village, covered by sale deed
No.2877/59 of the Sub Registrar Office, Chalai and partition
deed No.2799/86 of the Sub Registrar Office, Sasthamangalam.
On 24.09.1992, the father of the petitioners executed Ext.P1
settlement deed No.2835/1992/1 of the Sub Registrar Office,
Sasthamangalam. By virtue of Ext.P1 settlement deed, the 1 st
petitioner effected mutation of her property and remitted land
tax, as evidenced by Ext.P1(a) tax receipt dated 23.11.1995.
On 24.09.1992 itself, the father of the petitioner executed
Ext.P2 settlement deed No.2836/1992 dated 24.09.1992 of the
Sub Registrar Office, Sasthamangalam in favour of his wife
Sarojini and other daughters Sarala and Rajani (the 2 nd
petitioner herein) allotting 5 cents each to them in Peroorkada
Village. The A schedule property in Ext.P2 allotted to Sarojini is
in Sy.No.2469/118-1; B schedule property allotted to Sarala is
in Sy.No.2469/118-1; and C schedule property allotted to Rajani
is in Sy.No.2469/118-2-3. The 2 nd petitioner and other allottees
under Ext.P2 settlement deed effected mutation of their
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
respective properties and remitted land tax. Ext.P2(a) is the tax
receipt dated 12.05.1995 in respect of the property covered by
Ext.P2. According to the petitioners, when re-survey was
conducted, the whole 20 cents of land was included in Pattayam
No.T-6616, Re.Sy.No.377/16, Block No.23 and the total extent
of property was reduced to 16 cents (6.40 Ares). The 1 st
petitioner submitted Ext.P3 representation dated 24.06.2014,
Ext.P3(a) representation dated 10.07.2014 and Ext.P3(b)
representation dated 14.08.2014 for separating the properties
from the joint pattayam and also to rectify the mistakes in re-
survey records. Though the petitioners were issued with
separate pattayam, their grievance that in re-survey records,
the total extent of 20 cents was reduced to 16 cents was not
resolved. The document marked as Exts.P4 to P6 are the tax
receipts dated 23.09.2020, 18.11.2020 and 23.09.2020
respectively, whereby petitioners 1 and 2 and Sarojini remitted
land tax as per re-survey records.
2. The petitioners submitted Ext.P7 representation
dated 19.10.2020 before the respondents to measure out and
demarcate 5 cents each of property allotted to them and other
allottees under Exts.P1 and P2 settlement deeds and to make
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
necessary corrections in re-survey and revenue records. After
submission of Ext.P7 representation, the petitioners received
Ext.P8 notice dated 29.10.2020 of the 5 th respondent Deputy
Director of Survey and Land Records forwarding that
representation to the 1st respondent Tahasildar (Land Records).
Thereafter, the 1st respondent directed the petitioners to
produce the documents to prove their respective possession and
title over the properties. As per that direction, they submitted
all the required documents before the 1 st respondent. The
grievance of the petitioners is the delay in consideration of their
request in Ext.P7.
3. The petitioners have filed this writ petition under
Article 226 of the Constitution of India, seeking a writ of
mandamus commanding the respondents to measure out the
entire 20 cents of the property comprised in old Survey
No.2469, 2469/118/1-2-3 of Peroorkada Village as per Ext.P1
settlement deed No.2835/1992/I dated 24.09.1992 of Sub
Registrar Office, Sasthamangalam executed in favour of the 1 st
petitioner and Ext.P2 settlement deed No.2836/1992 dated
24.09.1992 of Sub Registrar Office, Sasthamangalam and
ascertain the boundaries and demarcate the properties of the
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
petitioners and to effect necessary correction in Re.Survey and
revenue records.
4. On 19.01.2021, when this writ petition came up for
admission, the learned Government Pleader was directed to get
instructions.
5. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and also
the learned Senior Government Pleader appearing for the
respondents.
6. The learned Senior Government Pleader would
submit that Ext.P7 application dated 19.10.2020, made by the
petitioners is now pending consideration before the 1 st
respondent Tahsildar (Land Records), who has already called for
a report from the Head Surveyor, which is awaited. On receipt of
that report, necessary orders will be passed on Ext.P7
application made by the petitioners.
7. The learned counsel for the petitioners would submit
that consideration of Ext.P7 application may be with notice to
the petitioners and after affording them an opportunity of being
heard.
8. Having considered the submission made by the
learned counsel on both sides, this writ petition is disposed of
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
with the following directions;
(i) The 1st respondent Tahsildar (Land Records) shall
take necessary steps to ensure that the report of the
Head Surveyor on Ext.P7 application made by the
petitioners is obtained within a period of two weeks from
the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment, if
not already received.
(ii) Thereafter, the 1st respondent shall consider and
take an appropriate decision on the request made by the
petitioners in Ext.P7 application, with notice to the
petitioners and other allottees under Ext.P2 settlement
deed, and after affording them an opportunity of being
heard, as expeditiously as possible, at any rate, within a
further period of two months.
9. In State of U.P. v. Harish Chandra [(1996) 9 SCC
309] the Apex Court held that no mandamus can be issued to
direct the Government to refrain from enforcing the provisions
of law or to do something which is contrary to law. In Bhaskara
Rao A.B. v. CBI [(2011) 10 SCC 259] the Apex Court
reiterated that, generally, no Court has competence to issue a
direction contrary to law nor can the Court direct an authority to
act in contravention of the statutory provisions. The courts are
meant to enforce the rule of law and not to pass the orders or
directions which are contrary to what has been injected by law.
10. Therefore, in terms of the direction contained in this
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
judgment, the 1st respondent shall take an appropriate decision
in the matter, strictly in accordance with law, taking note of the
relevant statutory provisions and also the law on the point.
No order as to costs.
Sd/-
ANIL K. NARENDRAN
JUDGE
MIN
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED
NO.2835/1992/DATED 24.09.1992 OF
SASTHAMANGALAM SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE
EXECUTED IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST
PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P1(A) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
DATED 23.11.1995 REMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER AS PER EXT.P1
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED
NO.2836/1992 DATED 24.09.1992 OF
SASTHAMANGALAM SUB REGISTRAR OFFICE
ALLOTTING 5 CENTS OF PROPERTY TO THE
2ND PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2(A) TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
DATED 12.05.1999 REMITTED BY THE 2ND
PETITIONER AS PER EXT.P2
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
24.06.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE
RESURVEY RECORDS
EXHIBIT P3(A) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
10.07.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE
RESURVEY RECORDS
EXHIBIT P3(B) TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
14.08.2014 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER FOR RECTIFICATION OF THE
SURVEY RECORDS
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
DATED 23.09.2020 REMITTED BY THE 1ST
PETITIONER AFTER THE RESURVEY
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
DATED 18.11.2020 REMITTED BY THE 2ND
PETITIONER AFTER THE RESURVEY
W.P.(C) No.1354 OF 2021(T)
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT
DATED 23.09.2020 OF SAROJINI REMITTED
AFTER THE RESURVEY
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION
DATED 19.10.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
29.10.2020 ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE PHOTCOPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
06.11.2020 ISSUED BY THE 1ST
RESPONDENT.
