Bushara vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 22367 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    TUESDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF NOVEMBER 2021 / 18TH KARTHIKA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 24590 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

          BUSHARA
          AGED 45 YEARS
          W/O. HARIS, KONGANAM HOUSE, PALLIKKARA, NANNAMMUKKU
          VILLAGE, PONNANI TALUK, MALAPPURAM 679 575

          BY ADVS.
          RAHUL SASI
          NEETHU PREM



RESPONDENTS:

    1     STATE OF KERALA
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE,
          STATE SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM 695 001

    2     THE DEPUTY COLLECTOR(L.R)
          COLLECTORATE, CIVIL STATION, MALAPPURAM 679 505

    3     THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,(LR)
          MINI CIVIL STATION BUILDING, TIRUR, MALAPPURAM 679 101

    4     THE VILLAGE OFFICER
          NANNAMMUKKU VILLAGE, MOOKKUTHALA P.O, MALAPPURAM 679
          574



          SMT. SURYA BINOY- SR. G.P




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
09.11.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 24590 OF 2021
                                 2



                            JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

asserting that a suo motu proceedings, bearing

S.M.No.1012 of 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 in

recently 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 WP(C) NO. 24590 OF 2021

dispose of such proceedings within a period of

eighteen months. I, therefore, do not see why

the 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.1012 of 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/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE SAS/09/11/2021 WP(C) NO. 24590 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 24590/2021

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF SUO MOTU PROCEEDINGS IN S.M 1012 OF 2021 DATED 22-10- 2021 ISSUED BY THE 3RD RESPONDENT.