Jacob Thomas vs The Revenue Divisional Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 12953 Ker

                        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                          PRESENT
                         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.SOMARAJAN
                                             &
                      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
             TUESDAY, THE 15TH DAY OF JUNE 2021 / 25TH JYAISHTA, 1943
                                   WP(C) NO. 11801 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

      1          JACOB THOMAS
                 AGED 72 YEARS
                 S/O.M.A.THOMAS, MULAMOOTTIL HOUSE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA
                 DISTRICT-689645.

      2          DR.ASHLEY THOMAS JACOB
                 AGED 46 YEARS
                 S/O.JACOB THOMAS, MULAMOOTTIL HOUSE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA
                 DISTRICT-689641.

                 BY ADVS.
                 ARUN.B.VARGHESE
                 AISWARYA V.S.


RESPONDENT/S:

      1          THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
                 OFFICE OF THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, ADOOR, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-
                 691523.

      2          THE VILLAGE OFFICER
                 VILLAGE OFFICE, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-689641.

      3          KOZHENCHERRY GRAMA PANCHAYAT
                 REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-
                 689641.

      4          THE SECRETARY
                 KOZHENCHERRY GRAMA PANCHAYATH, KOZHENCHERRY, PATHANAMTHITTA DISTRICT-
                 689641.


OTHER PRESENT:

                 GP SMT.SHEEJA.C.S.


THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 15.06.2021, THE COURT ON THE

SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C.) No.11801 of 2021            2




                  P.SOMARAJAN & P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, JJ
                         --------------------------------
                          W.P.(C.) No.11801 of 2021
                          -------------------------------
                     Dated this the 15th day of June, 2021


                                JUDGMENT

P.Somarajan, J.

It is pertaining to an appeal filed against the notice issued in

a land conservancy proceedings. It is submitted that the details

of the property not mentioned in the notice. But the petitioner

not mentioned any of their registered holding or any property

held by them and on what document they have acquired title or

right over the property. The statutory notice under the Act has to

be understood in relation to an existing right to a person to

whom the notice was issued and in the absence of existing right,

it would be statutory formality. At this juncture, the learned

counsel for the petitioner made a request to withdraw the writ

petition. With the liberty to exercise any remedy available to the

party concerned, the present writ petition is dismissed as

withdrawn.

SD/-

P.SOMARAJAN JUDGE

SD/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 11801/2021

PETITIONER ANNEXURE

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE BEARING NO.C3-148=68/21 DATED 17.05.2021 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE 1ST WRIT PETITIONER.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 20.05.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST WRIT PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 21.05.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE 1ST WRIT PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE MAHASER DATED 28.04.2021 PREPARED BY TALUK SURVEYOR AND VILLAGE OFFICER ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF SKETCH DATED 28.04.2021 PREPARED BY 2ND RESPONDENT, ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT UNDER THE RIGHT TO INFORMATION ACT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF INTERIM ORDER DATED 26.02.2021 IN WP(C)NO.14342/2019 OF THIS HONOURABLE HIGH COURT.