Seenath vs Revenue Divisional Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 12837 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
                 THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE C.S.DIAS
    THURSDAY, THE 10TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 20TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 10556 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

          SEENATH
          AGED 35 YEARS
          W/O. MUHAMMED SALEEM, THULUVANCHEERY,
          VATANAPPILLY,CHAVAKKAD-680614.

          BY ADV K.I.SAGEER



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
          REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICE, THRISSUR-680001.

    2     VILLAGE OFFICER,
          THANNIYAM VILLAGE, THANNIYAM, THRISSUR-680565.

    3     AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
          KRISHI BHAVAN, THANNIYAM, PERINGOTTUKARA-680565.


OTHER PRESENT:

          SRI.PAUL ABRAHAM VAKKANAL GP FOR R1 TO R3




    THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
10.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 10556 OF 2021
                                   2


                             JUDGMENT

The petitioner is the owner of 11.13 Ares of land

comprised in Sy.No.580/3 of Thanniyam Village covered by

Ext.P1 settlement deed.

2. The petitioner has averred in the writ petition that

the above-said property is described as 'paddy land' in the

revenue records. It is also shown as 'converted land' in

Ext.P3 Data Bank. According to the petitioner, the above

property is lying as dry land and is wrongly classified as

'paddy land' in the revenue records. The petitioner has

preferred Ext.P4 application before the 1 st respondent

seeking change of category of the above land. However,

there is inaction on the part of the 1st respondent in

considering and disposing of Ext.P4 application. Hence the

writ petition.

WP(C) NO. 10556 OF 2021

3. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner and the learned Government Pleader appearing for

the respondents.

4. Taking into account the fact that the petitioner has

preferred Ext.P4 application before the 1 st respondent as

early as on 04.03.2021, I direct the 1 st respondent to

consider and dispose of Ext.P4 application, in accordance

with law, as expeditiously as possible and at any rate within

a period of three months from the date of production of a

copy of this judgment.

The writ petition is ordered accordingly.

Sd/-

                                          C.S.DIAS
ma/ 10.6.2021                              JUDGE
                            /True copy/
                   APPENDIX OF WP(C) 10556/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

EXHIBIT P1            A TRUE COPY OF THE SETTLEMENT DEED

NO.808/2015 DATED 10.4.2015 OF SRO, ANTHIKAD.

EXHIBIT P2 A TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 19.2.2019 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT EXTRACT OF THE DATA BANK REGISTER MAINTAINED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION, FORM 6, SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER DATED 4.3.2021.