C.A.Sheneer vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 14345 Ker

WP(C) NO. 10297 OF 2021               1




                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
         THURSDAY, THE 8TH DAY OF JULY 2021 / 17TH ASHADHA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 10297 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

            C.A.SHENEER
            AGED 45 YEARS
            S/O.ALIYAR, CHIRAPPILLIYIL HOUSE, VELOORKUNNAM VILLAGE,
            MARKET P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT,
            PIN-686 673.

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.C.DILIP
            SMT.ANUSHKA VIJAYAKUMAR



RESPONDENT/S:

     1      STATE OF KERALA
            REPRESENTED BY SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
            REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN-695 001.

     2      TAHSILDAR, MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK,
            MINI CIVIL STATION, MUDAVOOR P.O., MUVATTUPUZHA,
            ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 669.

     3      THE VILLAGE OFFICER, VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE,
            MUVATTUPUZHA, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT, PIN-686 661.

            BY ADV   SMT.K AMMINIKUTTY, SR.G.P.
 WP(C) NO. 10297 OF 2021              2



THIS   WRIT   PETITION   (CIVIL)   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
08.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 10297 OF 2021                       3




                                        JUDGMENT

It is the case of the petitioner that he along with one Hafiz Hameed

are owners of property having an extent of 47.39 Ares comprised in

Sy.Nos.943/4/2, 943/4/1 and 943/5 of Velloorkunnam Village. The said

property was acquired on the strength of Ext.P1 Sale Deed. Out of the said

property, 5 cents was agreed to be sold to a certain Sri.Shihabudheen. As

per the understanding between the parties, the co-owners agreed to

convince the purchase about their saleable interest by producing a Record of

Rights (RoR) certificate from the 3rd respondent. Seeking issuance of the

RoR certificate, Ext.P3 application was submitted. The grievance of the

petitioner is that no action has been taken by the 3rd respondent on the said

application. It is in the afore circumstances that the petitioner is before this

Court seeking the following reliefs:

"a) Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus or any other writ, order or

direction commanding Respondent No.3 to consider and dispose Exhibit-

P3 application by issuing Record of Rights (ROR) in favour of the

petitioner, within a time as may be specified by this Hon'ble Court."

2. A statement has been filed by the 3rd respondent as directed by

this Court. It is stated that as per the BTR, the subject matter is a "Nilam".

If RoR is issued, it may lead to violation of the provisions of the Kerala

Conservation of Paddy and Wet Land Act, 2008. It is further submitted that

the petitioner had also filled up the land with red soil violating the provisions

of Act 28 of 2008.

3. I have considered the submissions advanced. There is no dispute

with regard to the fact that the petitioner is one of the co-owners of the

property. The respondents also do not deny that Ext.P3 application is

pending before the 1st respondent. Nothing prevents the petitioner from

assigning the property. If the provisions of Act 28 of 2008 is violated, it is for

the respondents to initiate appropriate action for the same. Except for a

vague allegation in the statement filed before this Court, no other materials

are produced. The respondents have not been able to show that there is any

statutory embargo in assigning portions of the property covered under

Ext.P1. As no convincing reason is afforded for non consideration of Ext.P3, I

am of the view that necessary directions can be issued.

4. In the result, this writ petition will stand disposed of directing the

3rd respondent to take up Ext.P3 application, if the same is in order, and

pass appropriate orders in strict adherence to the provisions of law. Orders

shall be passed expeditiously, in any event, within a period of one month

from the date of production of a copy of this judgment.

5. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with

this judgment before the 3rd respondent to ensure compliance.

Sd/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V, JUDGE

DSV/8.7.21

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10297/2021

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF SALE DEED NO.5787/2012 OF SRO, MUVATTUPUZHA DATED 16.10.2012.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE PHOTO COPY OF AGREEMENT FOR SALE DATED 17.04.2021 EXECUTED BY THE JOINT OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY WITH MR.SHIHABUDHEEN.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF APPLICATION DATED 09.04.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS: NIL