Aisha Beevi vs Revenue Divisional Officer
2021 Latest Caselaw 19295 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
    TUESDAY, THE 14TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 23RD BHADRA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 28976 OF 2013
PETITIONER/S:

          AISHA BEEVI,,
          AGED 55 YEARS
          W/O.RICHAR JAISHER @ JOSE, RESIDING AT HOUSE
          NO.IX/3375, NEAR CIVIL SUPPLIES OFFICE, MUNNAR COLONY
          ROAD, MUNNAR, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612.

          BY ADV SRI.A.J.VARGHESE



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
          DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612.

    2     MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH
          REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY, MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH,
          MUNNAR P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612.

    3     TAHSILDAR,
          DEVIKULAM, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 612.

          R1 & R3 BY SRI.K.P.HARISH, SR.GP

          R2 BY SRI.ARUN THOMAS, SC


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
14.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 28976 OF 2013
                                      -2-



                                 JUDGMENT

Petitioner is a permanent resident of Munnar Grama Panchayat. He is

basically aggrieved by Ext.P8 communication issued by the Special Tahsildar,

Special Revenue Office, Munnar, dated 23.10.2013, directing the petitioner to

stop the construction activities carried out by the petitioner in the property

situated in Sy.No.912 part in KDH Village, since the petitioner has not

secured No Objection Certificate from the revenue authorities, in compliance

with the directions contained in W.P.(C).No.34095 of 2007, before carrying

out the construction. According to the petitioner, petitioner has approached

this Court earlier by filing W.P.(C).No.16044 of 2013 and secured a judgment

dated 01.08.2013, whereby, the writ petition was disposed of, directing the

petitioner to seek a No Objection Certificate from the Tahsildar, Devikulam.

Thereupon, petitioner has submitted Ext.P7 application seeking No Objection

Certificateon 03.10.2013, which his apparently pending consideration before

the Tahsildar, Devikulam. Anyhow, without making any reference to the

application submitted by the petitioner, Ext.P8 was issued by the Special

Tahsildar, Special Revenue Office, Munnar. These are the background facts

available to consider the relief sought for by the petitioner to quash Ext.P8.

2. I have heard Sri. K.P.Harish, learned Senior Government Pleader and WP(C) NO. 28976 OF 2013

Sri. Arun Thomas, learned Counsel appearing for the Munnar Grama

Panchayat and perused the pleadings and the documents on record.

3. It is quite clear and evident from Ext.P6 judgment rendered by this

Court in W.P.(C).No.16044 of 2013 dated 01.08.2013, that the petitioner was

granted liberty to file an application seeking No Objection Certificate before

the revenue authorities so as to comply with the directions contained in the

order in W.P.(C).No.34095 of 2007, rendered by a Division Bench of this

Court. When the petitioner has submitted Ext.P7 application, definitely the

revenue authorities ought to have taken into consideration the stay

application in order to ascertain as to whether the petitioner is entitled to get

a No Objection Certificate for carrying out the construction. On a perusal of

Ext.P8, it is clear that the said application was never taken into consideration

by the Special Tahsildar, Special Revenue Officer, Munnar, probably for the

reason that the petitioner has submitted the application dated 03.10.2013,

before the Tahsildar, Devikulam.

3. Anyhow, when the matter came up for admission before this Court,

an interim order was passed by this Court on 26.11.2013, directing the

respondents not to demolish the structures put up by the petitioner.

Therefore, the writ petition is disposed of, leaving open the liberty of the

petitioner to pursue Ext.P7 application submitted by him before the WP(C) NO. 28976 OF 2013

appropriate statutory authority. If the application is not already disposed of,

a decision shall be taken by the considered statutory authority namely, the

revenue authorities, at the earliest and at any rate, within two months from

the date of receipt of a copy of this judgment. Till such time, the interim

order granted by this Court would be operative. I also make it clear that, if

already the issue in regard to the No Objection Certificate is finalised by the

revenue authorities, the proceedings shall not be reopened.

The writ petition is disposed of accordingly.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE

uu 14.09.2021 WP(C) NO. 28976 OF 2013

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 28976/2013

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1.TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE PATTA NO.LA- 6/98/B4 DATED 31/3/1999 ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDATR DEVIKULAM TO THE EXTENT OF 4 CENTS OF LAND IN SY. NO.912 PART IN KDH VILLAGE.

EXHIBIT P2.TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE LAND TAX RE CEIPT DATED 5/7/2013 FOR THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2013-2014 IN RESPECT OF LAND IN SY. NO.912 PART OF THE KDH VILLAGE.

EXHIBIT P3.TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RECEIPT OF THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT RECEIPT DATED 9/4/2013 IN RESPECT OF THE SUBMISSION OF THE APPLICATION FOR BUILDING PERMIT.

EXHIBIT P4.TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE OWNERSHIP CERTIFICATE NO.B3-2202/2013 DATED 19/4/2013 ISSUED BY THE PANCHAYATH TO THE PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P5.TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 30/5/2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE PRESIDENT OF THE MUNNAR GRAMA PANCHAYATH

EXHIBIT P6.TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE JUDGMENT IN WPC NO.16044/2013 OF THE HONOURABLE COURT.

EXHIBIT P7.TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE RTEPRESENTATION DATED 3/10/.2013 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE TAHSILDAR, DEVIKULAM.

EXHIBIT P8.TRUE PHOTOCOPY OF THE ORDER NO.81/2013 DATED 23/10/2013 ISSUED BY THE OFFICER ATTACHD AND CONTROLLED BY THE RESPONDENT TO THE PETITIONER