Jayaprakash vs Kaverikutty
2021 Latest Caselaw 2988 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                PRESENT

              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN

    WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF JANUARY 2021 / 7TH MAGHA, 1942

         Con.Case(C).No.1908 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20349/2019

   AGAINST THE JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 20349/2019(P) OF HIGH COURT OF
                              KERALA


PETITIONER:

               JAYAPRAKASH
               AGED 54 YEARS
               S/O.KRISHNAN, CHEKKINI, VADAKKANCHERRY,
               PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

               BY ADV. SRI.K.MOHANAKANNAN

RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT:

               KAVERIKUTTY
               (AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER)
               REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, PALAKKAD - 678502.


               SMT A.C.VIDHYA- GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 27.01.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
                                      2


Con.Case(C).No.1908 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20349/2019




                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has filed this contempt case, alleging non-

compliance of the direction contained in Annexure-A1 judgment of

this Court dated 25.07.2019 in W.P.(C).No.20349/2019, whereby

that writ petition was disposed of by directing the respondent

herein to consider and pass appropriate orders on Ext.P5

application made by the petitioner under Section 27A of the Act,

after obtaining necessary report from the concerned Village Officer,

as per the mandate of Section 27A of the Act, read with Rule 12 of

the Rules, and in strict compliance of the procedure contemplated

under the aforesaid provisions, as expeditiously as possible, at any

rate, within a period of three months from the date of receipt of a

certified copy of this judgment. It was made clear that this Court

has not expressed anything as to the claim made by the petitioner

that his land is an 'unnotified land' and it is for the respondent

herein to take an appropriate decision on that issue, if found

necessary by calling for an inspection report from the concerned

Local Level Monitoring Committee.

2. On 26.11.2020, when this contempt case came for

Con.Case(C).No.1908 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20349/2019

admission, the learned Government Pleader sought time to get

instructions.

3. On 07.12.2020, the respondent was directed to file an

affidavit, explaining the inordinate delay in complying the

Annexure-A1 judgment. It was made clear that the pendency of

this contempt case will not stand in the way of the respondent

taking necessary steps to comply with the direction contained in

the judgment dated 25.07.2019 in W.P.(C).No.20349/2019.

4. Along with the affidavit of the respondent, a copy of

Annexure-A proceedings dated 06.01.2021 of the respondent

placed on record. In paragraph 5 of the affidavit the respondent

has tendered unconditional apology for the delay in complying with

the direction contained in Annexure-A1 judgment.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit

that the respondent has complied with the direction contained in

Annexure-A1 by issuing Annexure-A proceedings, whereby the

request made by the petitioner is allowed in part. The petitioner

proposes to challenge Annexure-A in appropriate proceedings.

Without prejudice to the said right of the petitioner this contempt

Con.Case(C).No.1908 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20349/2019

case may be closed.

In such circumstances, this contempt case is closed, without

prejudice to the aforesaid right of the petitioner.

Sd/-

ANIL K.NARENDRAN JUDGE hmh

Con.Case(C).No.1908 OF 2020 IN WP(C). 20349/2019

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A1 CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT W.P.(C) NO.20349/2019 DATED 25/7/2019.

RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS:

ANNEXURE A TRUE COPY OF PROCEEDINGS DATED 06.01.2021