Sherly And Another vs The District Collector And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 15531 Ker

WP(C) NO. 5432 OF 2011                 1



                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                    PRESENT

                 THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN

            FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2021 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1943

                             WP(C) NO. 5432 OF 2011

PETITIONER/S:
            SHERLY
            SASTHAMTHOPPU VEEDU,
            ANAKUDY,VAMANAPURAM PO, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, DISTRICT.

              SUNIL KUMAR
              SASTHAMTHOPPU VEEDU, ANAKKUDY, VAMANAPURAM P.O.
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT

              BY ADVS.
              SRI.V.G.ARUN
              SRI.T.R.HARIKUMAR


RESPONDENT/S:

      1      THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
             COLLECTORATE
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001.

      2      THE TAHILDAR, NEDUMANGAD TALUK
             REVENUE TOWER,NEDUMANGAD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695541

      3      THE ADDITIONAL TAHILDAR(SURVEY)
             NEDUMANGAD TALUK, REVENUE TOWER,, NEDUMANGAD,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 541.

      4      THE TALUK SURVEYOR NEDUMANGAD TALUK
             REVENUE TOWER,NEDUMANGAD,THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695541

      5      REJESWARI D/O.VASUDEVAN, KODAYIL VEEDU
             MELATTU MOOZHI,KARIMKUTTIKKARA PO, VAMANAPURAM,,
             THIRUVANANTHAPURAM DISTRICT 695 606.

             BY ADVS.
             SRI.K.SATHEESH KUMAR
             SRI.T.A.UNNIKRISHNAN

OTHER PRESENT:

              SMT.MABLE.C.KURIAN, GP

      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION       ON
23.07.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 5432 OF 2011              2




                      P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                --------------------------------------------
                    W.P.(C.) No.5432 of 2011
                   --------------------------------------
               Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2021


                              JUDGMENT

According to the petitioners, they are the legal heirs of

one Sukumara Panicker, who obtained the lease of 1.99

acres of land in survey No.128/1 of Nedumangad Village.

The husband of the 5th respondent claimed that this

property was given to him by Travancore Devaswom Board

on oral lease and certain other persons also claimed to be

the tenants of the Travancore Devaswom Board. The Land

Tribunal, Kollam initiated suo moto proceedings under the

Land Reforms Act and the Land Tribunal hold that the

husband of the 5th respondent is entitled to fixity of tenure

in respect of 1.99 acres of land in survey No. 128/1.

Challenging the same, the father of the petitioners filed

appeal before the appellate authority as AA 47/1981. The

appellate authority dismissed the appeal. Challenging the

same, the father of the petitioners filed CRP No.604/1990

before this Court. This Court disposed the revision holding

that the claimants could not establish their case and thus

held that the Travancore Devaswom Board was not in a

position to grant lease in the year 1959 to the claimants and

that they have no right or claim in the property.

Accordingly, the revision was allowed and the impugned

orders were set aside. The 5th respondent not challenged

Ext.P1 and Ext.P1 order became final. Thereafter, Ext.P3

notice is received by Taluk Surveyor to measure the

property, which was at the instance of the 5 th respondent. At

this stage, the petitioners submitted Ext.P4 before the

Tahsildar stating that the property cannot be measured at

the instance of the 5th respondent, who is not the owner of

the property. Thereafter, the above writ petition is filed with

the following prayers:

"i) to issue a writ of certiorari calling for the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P3 and quash the same.

ii) to issue a writ of mandamus or any appropriate writ order or direction, directing respondents 2 and 3 to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P4 representation and decide the right of the 5 th respondent in filing the application for measurement

iii) to grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit in the circumstances of the case."

2. This Court passed an interim stay of further

proceedings, consequent to Ext.P3 and the interim order is

in force even now.

3. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the

Government Pleader. I also heard the counsel for the 5 th

respondent.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of this

case, I think this writ petition can be disposed, directing the

2nd respondent to consider Ext.P4 before proceeding with

Ext.P3. The contentions of the petitioners and the 5 th

respondent are left open. The 2nd respondent is directed to

consider the same and pass appropriate orders after

hearing the petitioner and the 5th respondent. Therefore,

this writ petition is disposed in the following manner :

1) The second respondent is directed to consider Ext.P4 and

pass appropriate orders in it, after hearing the petitioner

and the 5th respondent, as expeditiously as possible, at any

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

of this judgment.

2) All the contentions of the petitioners in this writ petition

are left open.

3) The interim order passed by this Court will continue, till

final orders are passed in Ext.P4.

SD/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS

APPENDIX

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

EXT P1 A TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN CRP NO.604/1990 DATED 7.4.1997

EXT.P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT DATED 3.9.2010

EXT.P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE RECEIVED BY THE PETITIONERS DATED 1.1.2011

EXT.P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FIELD BY THE 2ND PETITIONER DATED 7.1.2011

RESPONDENT'S EXHIBITS : NIL

//TRUE COPY//

PA TO JUDGE

SKS