Citation : 2021 Latest Caselaw 8808 Ker
Judgement Date : 17 March, 2021
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
WEDNESDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF MARCH 2021 / 26TH PHALGUNA, 1942
WP(C).No.21025 OF 2020(C)
PETITIONER:
LAILA SADIQUE
AGED 47 YEARS
W/O.K.Y.SADIQUE MUHAMMED,
KARIKKANAKUDIYIL HOUSE,
VAZHAPPILLY KARA, MUDAVOOR.P.O,
VELLOORKUNNAM VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA,
ERNAKULAM,PIN-686669.
BY ADVS.
SRI.P.B.KRISHNAN
SRI.P.B.SUBRAMANYAN
SRI.SABU GEORGE
SRI.MANU VYASAN PETER
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, PAINAV.P.O,
KUYILIMALA, IDUKKI-685603.
3 THE TAHASILDAR(LR),
TALUK OFFICE, MINI CIVIL STATION,
UDUMBANCHOLA, NEDUMKANDOM,
IDUKKI-685553.
4 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
CHATHURANGAPARA VILLAGE OFFICE,
IDUKKI-685554.
5 UDUMBANCHOLA GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
UDUMBANCHOLA, IDUKKI-685554,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY.
WP(C).No.21025 OF 2020(C) 2
R5 BY ADV. SRI.LIJI J.VADAKKEDAM, SC,
UDUMBANCHOLA GRAMA PANCHAYAT
SRI JAFAR KHAN, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON
17.03.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C).No.21025 OF 2020(C) 3
JUDGMENT
Being aggrieved by the issuance of Ext.P10 notice by the 2nd
respondent calling upon the petitioner to demolish the building situated in
property comprised in Sy. No.4/2 of Chathurangapara Village, the petitioner has
approached this Court. The petitioner has also sought for a declaration that the
regulatory provisions in the Cardamom Rules, 1905 and 1935 cannot be invoked
by the State of Kerala and its functionaries in respect of the land belonging to the
Petitioner in Sy. Nos.69, 4/2, 3/3, 3/1 and 98/1 of Chathurangapara Village
acquired as per the Sale deed dated 29.08.2018 registered as document No.1764
of 2018 in SRO, Udumbanchola.
2. A counter affidavit has been filed by the 2nd respondent.
Paragraph Nos.5 and 6 are extracted below for convenience.
"5. Pursuant to the writ petition, a meticulous enquiry was
conducted by the 3rd respondent on the directions of this respondent in the subject matter. The Taluk Surveyor was entrusted to inspect the land with all connected survey records and to submit a detailed report. The Taluk Surveyor conducted site inspection and found that there were no construction on the land comprised in Survey No.4/2 as alleged by the Village Officer. Instead of the land in Survey No.4/2, the constructions are actually over the land comprised in Survey No.3/3. It has been reported by the Taluk Surveyor that both land included in Survey No.4/2 and Survey No.3/3 are recorded in the Basic Tax Register as "Dry Land- Cereal Cultivation". However the land in Survey No.4/2 is seen denoted in the Thandaper Account Register as "Cardamom Land" erroneously.
Now it has been clearly revealed that the land in question (Survey No.4/2) as well as the land in Survey No.3/3 are not cardamom land and hence the action taken against the petitioner in these regard are based on mistake of facts. The then Village Officer has been directed to submit an explanation for his mistake in reporting the case without verifying the records concerned.
6. It is humbly submitted that the whole procedures taken against the petitioner in this connection are due to the mistake of facts in appraising the actual lie and nature of the land with the survey records. As the resurvey records have not been implemented in Chathurangappara Village so far, the Revenue Officials have to depend on the old Litho Map (in which measurement of survey fields- mostly minor circuits- are not available) for fixing the individual holdings. As a matter of fact, in such a situation there are chances for errors in fixing the exact holding. It is respectfully submitted that the respondents are ready to admit the fact that there are some mistakes on their part in dealing with the subject matter inadvertently. The Exhibit P10 notice may be treated as withdrawn, if the Hon'ble High Court permits for the same."
3. The respondents have stated that the action taken against the
petitioner is based on a mistake of fact. They have also withdrawn Ext.P10
notice. In that view of the matter, no further orders are required to be
passed in this Writ Petition.
This Writ Petition is closed.
Sd/-
RAJA VIJAYARAGHAVAN V
JUDGE NS
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED DATED 29.08.2018 REGISTERED AS DOCUMENT NO.1764 OF 2018 IN SRO, UDUBANCHOLA
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE SITE PLAN OF THE BUILDING
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED 14.02.2019 ISSUED FROM THE VILLAGE OFFICE, CHATHURANGAPARA
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT NO.119020105454 DATED 24.02.2020 ISSUED BY FROM THE UDUMBANCHOLA GRAMA PANCHAYAT
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF RECEIPT NO.119020105456 DATED 24.02.2020 ISSUED FROM THE UDUMBANCHOLA GRAMA PANCHAYAT
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.01/2020 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.4,DATED 05.02.2020
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION, DATED 11.02.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE RESPONDENT NO.3
EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE, DATED 29.2.2020 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2.
EXHIBIT P9 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION, DATED 11.03.2020 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENT NO.2
EXHIBIT P10 A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 15.09.2020 ISSUED BY RESPONDENT NO.2
EXHIBIT P11 TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT NO.KL06031600631/2020 DATED 03.06.2020 ISSUED FROM THE CHATHURANGAPARA VILLAGE OFFICE.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS:NIL
//TRUE COPY//
P.A TO JUDGE
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!