Raihanath vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 21959 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 3RD DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 12TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                          WP(C) NO. 24042 OF 2021


PETITIONER:

              RAIHANATH, AGED 48 YEARS, W/O. ABU HANEEFA,
              MOLLANCHERY HOUSE, THALAKKAD AMSOM, THEVALAPPURAM
              DESAM, B. P. ANGADI POST, TIRUR TALUK, MALAPPURAM
              DISTRICT, PIN - 676 102.

              BY ADVS.
              BINU V V VEETTIL VALAPPIL
              S.K.PREMJITH MENON


RESPONDENTS:

     1        STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY TO
              GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
              THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.

     2        THE VILLAGE OFFICER, THRIKKANDIYUR VILLAGE OFFICE,
              BEHIND TIRUR POLICE STATION, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM
              DISTRICT, PIN - 676 101.

     3        THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS)
              OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LR),
              THE LAND TRIBUNAL, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT
              - 676 101.

              SMT.SURYA BINOY SR.G.P


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
03.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WPC 24042/21
                                           2



                              JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

asserting that a suo motu proceedings, bearing

S.M.No.1299/2021 has been initiated against her

by the 3rd respondent - Special Tahsildar (Land

Reforms); and seeks that the same be directed to

be disposed of within a time frame to be fixed by

this Court.

2. In response, the learned Senior Government

Pleader - Smt.Surya Binoy, submitted that the

afore mentioned suo motu proceedings was

initiated against the petitioner only on

18.09.2021 and therefore, that this writ petition

is premature.

3. Even though I find the afore submissions

of the learned Senior Government Pleader to be

valid, I am also aware that, as a rule, this

Court directs the competent authority to dispose

of such proceedings within a period of eighteen

months. I, therefore, do not see why the WPC 24042/21

petitioner should not be given the said benefit.

Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered,

directing the 3rd respondent to complete

proceedings in S.M.No.1299/2021, after following

due procedure and after affording necessary

opportunity of being heard to the petitioner - as

also any other interested person - as

expeditiously as is possible, but not later than

eighteen months from the date of receipt of a

certified copy of this judgment.

Sd/-

RR                                      DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
                                             JUDGE
 WPC 24042/21


               APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24042/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1         TRUE COPY OF THE SUOMOTO REPORT DATED
                   18.09.2021.