Kerala High Court
Vilasini M vs The Tahsildar on 8 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
MONDAY, THE 08TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 17TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.23996 OF 2020(Y)
PETITIONER(S):
1 VILASINI M.,
AGED 63 YEARS,
W/O.K.B. RADHAKRISHNAN, VIJAYA VILAS, MANIYAL,
KANDANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682305.
2 M.S. GEETHA PEETHAMBARAN,
AGED 51 YEARS,
W/O. PEETHAMBARAN, MANIYAL HOUSE,
KANDANAD, ERNAKULAM - 682305.
BY ADVS.
SRI.I.SREEHARI
SHRI.VIVEK VIJAYAKUMAR
RESPONDENT(S) :
1 THE TAHSILDAR
KANAYANNUR TALUK, KANAYANNUR TALUK OFFICE,
ERNAKULAM - 682011.
2 DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PANACHAYATH,
ERNAKULAM, CIVIL STATION, KAKKANAD,
ERNAKULAM - 682030.
3 THE SECRETARY
CHOTTANIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
CHOTTANIKKARA P O, - 682312, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT.
4 CHOTTANIKKARA GRAMA PANCHAYATH
CHOTTANIKKARA P O, - 682312, ERNAKULAM DISTRICT -
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
R3-R4 BY ADVS. SRI.P.MARTIN JOSE
SRI.P.PRIJITH
SRI.THOMAS P.KURUVILLA
SRI.MANJUNATH MENON
SRI.AJAY BEN JOSE
SRI.R.GITHESH
WP(C).No.23996 OF 2020(Y) 2
SHRI.HARIKRISHNAN S.
SMT MABLE C KURIAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
08.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.23996 OF 2020(Y) 3
JUDGMENT
The petitioners state that they are the absolute owners in title and
possession of property having an extent of about 16 cents in Survey
No.49/8 of Kanayannur Village situated in Ward No.10 of Chottanikkara
Grama Panchayat, which property devolved upon them on the strength of
Ext.P1 deed. They have been remitting tax as is evident from Ext.P2. They
contend that in a portion of the said property there exists a pond popularly
called as 'Kothachira Kulam'. Their grievance is that the respondents 3 and
4 have declared that they are launching a new project by including the
'Kothachira Kulam' without obtaining any previous consent from the
petitioners. In the said circumstances the petitioners are stated to have
approached the 1st respondent and submitted Ext.P4 representation
seeking action. Later, it was followed up with Ext.P13 request for
demarcation of the property. According to the petitioners, no action was
taken by the 1st respondent. It is further contended that they have also
approached the 3rd respondent and have submitted Exts.P3, P5 and P12
representations. It is contended that the 3rd respondent did not even care
to respond to the said request. It is in the afore circumstances that the
petitioners are before this Court seeking the following reliefs:
i) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order
direction commanding the 1st respondent to consider Exhibit P4 and
Exhibit P13 representation within a time frame fixed by this Hon'ble
Court.
ii) issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ or order
direction commanding the 3rd respondent to consider Exhibit P3,
Exhibit P5 and Exhibit P12 representation within a time frame fixed
by this hon'ble Court.
iii) Declare that the respondent Panchayath has no manner of
right to make or implement any work or activities in the property
covered by Ext.P1 Kothachira Kulam without the permission of
petitioner.
iv) award cost to the petitioner.
2. Though ample opportunity was granted to the respondents to file
their statement, no statement has been filed till date.
3. Sri.Sreehari, the learned counsel appearing for the petitioners
submitted that his limited prayer is for a direction to the party respondents
to consider the representations of the petitioners within a time frame and
until then to refrain from carrying out any construction activities.
4. Sri.P.Martin Jose, the learned counsel appearing for the Panchayat
submitted that the property wherein the Panchayat is launching projects are
those properties which have been included in the Asset Register of the
Panchayat. He submits that the representations submitted by the petitioners
can be heard and disposed of within a time frame.
5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances and the
submissions made across the bar, the following directions are issued.
1. The 1st respondent shall take up Ext.P4 and P13
representations submitted by the 1st petitioner and take a decision
with notice to the petitioners as well as the Panchayat,
expeditiously, at any rate within a period of 60 days from the date
of receipt of a copy of this judgment.
2. The 3rd respondent shall take up Ext.P12 representation
submitted by the 1st petitioner and take a decision with notice to the
petitioners within a period of 90 days from the date of receipt of a
copy of this judgment.
3. Until a decision is taken by the 1st respondent, the 3rd
respondent shall not undertake any new project involving the
Kothachira Kulam without the consent of the petitioners.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE
DSV
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 15.12.1959.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
28.02.2015.
EXHIBIT P3(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
02.03.2015.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
10.06.2015.
EXHIBIT P5(a) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT RECEIPT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION DATED
04.09.2015 FILED UNDER RIGHT TO INFORMATION
ACT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE COMPLAINT DATED 26.09.2015.
EXHIBIT P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 30.09.2015.
EXHIBIT P9 TRUE COPY OF THE REPLY DATED 19.09.2015.
EXHIBIT P10 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND RELINQUISHMENT
APPLICATION.
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT NEWS PAPER REPORT
DATED 29.05.2018.
EXHIBIT P12 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
15.10.2020.
EXHIBIT P13 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
16.10.2020.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
