St.Marys Church vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 7583 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                           PRESENT

         THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.B.SURESH KUMAR

  THURSDAY, THE 04TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 13TH PHALGUNA,
                           1942

                   WP(C).No.5688 OF 2021(I)


PETITIONER:

              ST.MARYS CHURCH
              MARUTHA,MARUTHA P.O., VAZHIKKADAVU,
              MALAPPURAM DISTRICT, REP.BY ITS VICAR
              FR. THOMAS MANAKKUNNEL

              BY ADV. SMT.BIMALA BABY

RESPONDENTS:

     1        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
              COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM 686
              505

     2        THE TAHSILDAR
              TALUK OFFICE, NILAMBUR 679 329

     3        THE DISTRICT MEDICAL OFFICER
              PHC HOSPITAL, VAZHIKADAVU - MALAPPURAM 676
              505

     4        VAZHIKKADAVU GRAMA PANCHAYATH
              VAZHIKKADAVU MALAPPURAM,
              REP.BY ITS SECRETARY 679 333

              BY GOVERNMENT PLEADER SRI. RAVIKRISHNAN

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP             FOR
ADMISSION ON 04.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME             DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C).No.5688 OF 2021(I)
                                   ..2..




                     W.P.(C) No.5688 of 2021
                  --------------------------------------

                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner preferred an application for establishment

of a cemetery in terms of the provisions of the Kerala Panchayat Raj

(Burial and Burning Grounds) Rules, 1998. Ext.P1 is the application.

It is stated that the application has been forwarded by the fourth

respondent to the first respondent with its recommendations

through the third respondent and the application is now pending

consideration before the first respondent. The grievance of the

petitioner in the writ petition concerns the inaction on the part of

the first respondent in taking a decision on Ext.P1 application.

2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner as

also the learned Government Pleader.

3. Having regard to the fact that Ext.P1 is an

application preferred as early as on 28.02.2009, I deem it

appropriate to dispose of the writ petition directing the first

respondent to consider and pass orders on the said application,

within three months with notice to all persons concerned. Ordered

accordingly.

Sd/-

P.B.SURESH KUMAR JUDGE ds 04.03.2021 WP(C).No.5688 OF 2021(I) ..3..

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.2.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE PRESCRIBED PERFORMA BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE OF THE PROPERTY DATED 14.3.2007 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 28.3.2009 ISSUED BY THE 4TH RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER CHURCH

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED 28.2.2009 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER BEARING NO.C3/8199/09 DATED 3/8/09 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER CHURCH.

EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 20.9.2016 SUBMITTED BY THE PRESIDENT, 4TH RESPONDENT PANCHAYAT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12/10/2020 THUS SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.