Santhosh Achari vs The Tahsildar
2021 Latest Caselaw 21139 Ker

             IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
    WEDNESDAY, THE 20TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2021 / 28TH ASWINA, 1943
                      WP(C) NO. 18438 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
     1     SANTHOSH ACHARI, S/O.LATE AMBI ACHARI KANDATHIL
           PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE, VALAKAM VILLAGE, VALKAM-
           MUTATTUPUZHA -682316.

    2     NAGESH ACHARI,
          S/O.LATE AMBI ACHARI ,KANDATHIL PUTHANPURAYIL HOUSE,
          VALAKAM VILLAGE, VALKAM-MUVATTUPUZHA-682316.

    3     JINU.K.MYTHEEN,
          S/O MYTHEENKATTUKUDIYIL HOUSE, MULAVOOR.P.O,
          MUVATTUPUZHA-686673.

    4     A.M.MUHAMMADALI,
          S/O.A.E.MAKKAR,ARYANGALAYIL HOUSE,
          KAVUNKARA,MUVATTUPUZHA.

          SRI.L.RAM MOHAN
          SRI.M.AUBREY ABRAHAM ISAAC


RESPONDENTS:
     1     THE TAHSILDAR
           MUVATTUPUZHA TALUK CIVIL STATION, MUVATTUPUZHA-686669.

    2     THE VILLAGE OFFICER
          MARADI VILLAGE, MUVATTUPUZHA-686673.

    3     THE EXECUTIVE ENGINEER
          KERALA STATE TRANSPORT PROJECT, MUVATTUPUZHA-686661.

    4     THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
          CIVIL STATION, MUVATTUPUZHA-686669.

    5     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
          CIVIL STATION, KAKKANADU, ERNAKULAM, PIN-682030.

          SMT. SURYA BINOY- SR. G.P


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
20.10.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 18438 OF 2021
                                  2


                           JUDGMENT

The petitioners singularly pray that the statutory

appeal, namely Ext.P8, preferred under Rule 21 of the Kerala

Land Assignment Rules, be directed to be disposed of by the

fourth respondent - RDO, within a time frame to be fixed by

this Court.

2. The learned Government Pleader, Smt.Surya Binoy,

submitted that if the petitioners only require Ext.P8 to be

taken up and disposed of by the fourth respondent - RDO,

there does not appear to be any legal impediment in doing

so; but prayed that this Court may not make any affirmative

declarations as to the entitlement of the petitioners to any

relief and leave it to the competent Authority to take a

decision on it in terms of law.

3. In the afore circumstances, I allow this writ petition

and direct the fourth respondent - RDO to take up Ext.P8

statutory appeal of the petitioners and dispose of the same,

after affording them an opportunity of being heard and after

following due procedure; thus culminating in an appropriate

order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible, but not later

than one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this WP(C) NO. 18438 OF 2021

judgment.

Needless to say, until such time as the afore exercise is

completed and the resultant order communicated to the

petitioners, the status quo with respect to the property in

question, as available today, shall be maintained by both

sides.

Sd/- DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE stu WP(C) NO. 18438 OF 2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 18438/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 3.8.89 ISUSED BY MUVATTPUZHA MUNICIPALITY WITH TYPED COPY

Exhibit P2 COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 21.6.89 ISSUED BY THE ASSISTANT EXECUTIVE ENGINEER

Exhibit P3 COPY OF THE NOTICE ISSUED UNDER RULE 12(1)

Exhibit P4 COPY OF G.O(MS)232/80/RD DATED 26.2.80.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 23.2.09

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 17.1.18 IN WRIT PETITION NO.(C)41420/17.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 22/10/19

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE APPEAL BEFORE RDO

Exhibit P8(A) TRUE COPY OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF THE EVICTION NOTICE DATED 2/8/21.