Nishad Gopi vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 15540 Ker

WP(C) NO. 14633 OF 2021         1

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
     FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2021 / 1ST SRAVANA, 1943
                    WP(C) NO. 14633 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

    1     NISHAD GOPI,
          AGED 40 YEARS,
          S/O P. R. GOPI, PUTHUVEETIL HOUSE, VAGAMON P. O.,
          IDUKKI DIST.

    2     NITIN GOPI,
          S/O P. R. GOPI, PUTHUVEETIL HOUSE, VAGAMON P. O.,
          IDUKKI DIST.

    3     NISHA GOPI,
          D/O P. R. GOPI, PUTHUVEETIL HOUSE, VAGAMON P. O.,
          IDUKKI DIST.

          BY ADVS.
          V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR
          P.R.REENA
          P.S.SIDHARTHAN
          MAYA M.


RESPONDENT/S:

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

    2     TALUK LAND BOARD
          REP. BY ITS CHAIRMAN, MEENACHIL TALUK, MEENACHIL,
          KOTTAYAM DISTRICT, PIN - 686 577.

    3     VILLAGE OFFICER,
          POONJAR NADUBHAGOM VILLAGE, PANACHIPPARA, POONJAR,
          KOTTAYAM, PIN - 686581.

          SMT K AMMINIKUTTY, SR 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. 14633 OF 2021                 2

                                  JUDGMENT

The petitioners contend that property having an extent of 39.66 Ares of

land in Survey No.229/4-5 of Poonjar Nadubhagom village in Meenachil Taluk

was purchased by their late father Late Sri.P.R. Gopi on the cover of sale deed

No.1011/97 of Poonjar Sub Registry. He had carried out mutation in his favour

and has been paying basic tax as is evident from Exhibit P1. Their grievance is

that lately, the concerned respondent has refused to accept tax from the

petitioners stating one reason or the other. It is contended that the petitioners

are entitled to the benefit of Section 7E r/w. Section 84(4) of the Land Reforms

Act. It is further contended that the representation submitted by the petitioner

before the 3rd respondent was considered and Ext.P4 report was forwarded to

the Taluk Office by the Village Officer. It is contended that the 1st petitioner

has filed a petition before the 2nd respondent narrating all aspects. The

solitary prayer in this Writ Petition is for a direction to the 2nd respondent to

consider and pass orders on Ext.P5 in the light of Ext.P4 within a time frame.

2. I have heard Sri. V.M. Krishnakumar, the learned counsel

appearing for the petitioners and Smt. K. Amminikutty, the learned senior

Government Pleader.

3. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and the submissions

made across the Bar, this writ petition is disposed of directing the 2nd

respondent to take up Ext.P5 petition, if the same is in order, and pass

appropriate orders strictly in accordance with law, in the light of Ext.P4, with

notice to the petitioners as well as the affected parties, if any. The orders as

directed above shall be passed as expeditiously, at any rate, within a period of

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

The petitioners shall produce a copy of the writ petition along with

this judgment before the 2nd respondent to ensure compliance.

SD/-

RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V JUDGE NS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 14633/2021

PETITIONER(S) EXHIBITS :

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT FOR THE PROPERTY FOR THE YEAR 2009-10 DATED 25.05.2009.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED BY THE KERALA STATE ELECTRICITY BOARD DATED 23.11.2010.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION FILED BY THE 2ND PETITIONER BEFORE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 19.09.2019.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT DATED 23.09.2019.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12.07.2021 FILED BY THE 1ST PETITIONER BEFORE THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

RESPONDENT(S) EXHIBITS : NIL