Fathima vs The District Collector
2021 Latest Caselaw 19707 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                    PRESENT
              THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
     FRIDAY, THE 17TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 26TH BHADRA, 1943
                         WP(C) NO. 19403 OF 2021
PETITIONER:

               FATHIMA
               AGED 60 YEARS,D/O.LATE KADEEJA,
               HOUSE, KALLADIKODE, MANNARKKAD TALUK,
               PALAKKAD DISTRICT.


               BY ADVS.
               P.JAYARAM
               GIGI PAPPACHAN



RESPONDENTS:

       11      THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
               PALAKKAD-678001.

       12      THE LAND TRIBUNAL/SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND
               REFORMS)OTTAPPALAM - 691 101.

       13      THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KARIMBA-II VILLAGE OFFICE
               P.O. KARIMBA-678597.

       14      STATE OF KERALA
               REPRESENTED BY THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMETN OF
               REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
               THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695001.


OTHER PRESENT:

               Sri Aswin Sethumadhavan Sr GP




           THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON    17.09.2021,     THE   COURT    ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 19403 OF 2021          2

                          JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is stated to be a senior

citizen of over 60 years in age, has approached

this Court alleging that, even though a suo motu

proceedings has been initiated against her by the

2nd respondent - Land Tribunal/Special Tahsildar

(Land Reforms) and numbered as S.M.No.816 of 2017

further action thereon has not been completed until

now. The petitioner, therefore, prays the 2nd

respondent be directed to do so and issue

appropriate final orders thereon, within a time

frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. In response, the learned Senior Government

Pleader, Smt.K.Amminikutty, submitted that, if the

suo motu proceedings are still pending against the

petitioner, the same can be disposed of by the 2 nd

respondent, within a period of six months, taking

note of the fact that she is a senior citizen. She,

therefore, prayed that this writ petition be

ordered only on such terms.

3. When I consider the afore submissions, it is

ineluctable that if S.M.No.816 of 2017, is still

pending against the petitioner, then it will

require to be disposed of by the 2nd respondent

within a period of six months, because this is the

time frame that has been constantly followed by

this Court in the case of senior citizens.

Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered,

directing the 2nd respondent to complete proceedings

in S.M.No.816 of 2017, after following due

procedure and after affording necessary opportunity

of being heard to the petitioner - as also to any

other interested/affected persons - thus,

culminating in an apposite order thereon, as

expeditiously as is possible, but not later than

six months from the date of receipt of a certified

copy of this judgment.

This writ petition is thus disposed of.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/20.9

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19403/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 19.04.2017 IN S.M.816/2017 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER FROM THE OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS), OTTAPALAM.

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE DATED28.04.2017 ISSUED TO KADEEJA AND OTHERS FROM VILLAGE OFFICE KARIMBA-2.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 19.02.2021 ISSUED TO KADEEJA AND OTHERS FROMVILLAGE OFFICE KARIMBA-II.