Sr.Mini Mani vs State Of Kerala
2021 Latest Caselaw 19775 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                             PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
 THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 1ST ASWINA,
                              1943
                   WP(C) NO. 16130 OF 2021
PETITIONER/S:

           SR.MINI MANI
           AGED 52 YEARS
           D/O.MANI, BHAVANI LAY OUT, V11 CROSS,
           JYOTHIDAN STUDY HOUSE, BANGLORE-560029, FROM
           PULICKAKUNNEL HOUSE, ALPARA P.O., IDUKKI,
           KANJIKUZHI VILLAGE, IDUKKI TALUK & DISTRICT-
           685606.

           BY ADVS.
           GEORGE MATHEW
           M.D.SASIKUMARAN
           MATHEW K.T.
           PRAVEEN S.
           SUNIL KUMAR A.G
           GEORGE K.V.
           DIPU JAMES



RESPONDENT/S:

    1      STATE OF KERALA
           REP. BY ITS SECRETARY, REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
           GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
           695001.

    2      THE DIRECTOR, SURVEY AND LAND RECORDS,
           OFFICE OF THE DIRECTOR, SURVEY AND LAND
           RECORDS, VAZHUTHACADU, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
           695010.

    3      THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
           CIVIL STATION, KUYILIMALA, PAINAVU P.O.,
           IDUKKI-685603.

    4      THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
           CIVIL STATION, IDUKKI, KUYILIMALA, PAINAVU
           P.O., IDUKKI-685603.
 WPC 16130/2021
                                  2



     5       THE DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT,
             OFFICE OF THE DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT, CIVIL
             STATION, IDUKKI, KUYILIMALA, PAINAVU P.O., IDUKKI-
             685603.

     6       THE TALUK SURVEYOR,
             IDUKKI TALUK, CIVIL STATION, IDUKKI, KUYILIMALA,
             PAINAVU P.O., IDUKKI-685603.

     7       THE TAHSILDAR,
             LAND RECORDS, IDUKKI TALUK, TALUK OFFICE,
             VAZHATHOPE, IDUKKI-685603.

     8       THE VILLAGE OFFICER
             KANJIKUZHI VILLAGE, IDUKKI TALUK, (FORMERLY
             THODUPUZHA), IDUKKI DISTRICT-685606.


OTHER PRESENT:

             SRI. HANIL KUMAR - SPL.GP




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON   23.09.2021,   THE   COURT   ON   THE   SAME   DAY   DELIVERED   THE
FOLLOWING:
 WPC 16130/2021
                                 3



                   DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, J.
                           ------------------------
                      WP(C) No.16130 of 2021
                      ----------------------------------
            Dated, this the 23rd day of September, 2021

                         JUDGMENT

The petitioner impugns Ext.P11 order on various grounds,

but primarily that it has been issued without adverting to

Exts.P4 and P12 reports and that she had not been given a

proper opportunity of being heard before it had been issued,

inspite of the directions in Ext.P10 order of this Court.

2. Sri.George Mathew, learned counsel for the

petitioner, in addition to the afore, stated that Exts.P4 and P12

reports would show that the issues with respect to his client's

property had been settled affirmatively by the same Authority

who has now been issued Ext.P11 order; and therefore, that its

contents can only be seen to be flagrantly in violation of law.

He submitted that, consequently, since the issues relating to

his client's property cannot be reopend in this manner, this

Court must interdict all further action pursuant to Ext.P11 and WPC 16130/2021

prayed that the Tahsildar be directed to complete the

proceedings strictly in terms of Ext.P10 order of this Court.

3. The learned Special Government Pleader - Sri.Hanil

Kumar, opposed the afore plea of the petitioner, saying that

the petitioner has an effective, efficacious and alternative

statutory remedy under Section 13A of the Survey and

Boundaries Act, by filing an appeal before the District

Collector; and thus prayed that this Court may not, therefore,

consider the contentions of the petitioners, on its merits.

4. As regards the validity of Ext.P11, Sri.Hanil Kumar

asserted that it has been issued by the Tahsildar after

adverting to all relevant and germane aspects, and therefore

that the petitioner cannot assail the same, in the manner as

has been done in this writ petition. He, therefore, prayed that

this writ petition be dismissed.

5. I must say that I cannot find full favour with the

afore submissions of the learned Special Government Pleader

because, in Ext.P10, directions had already been issued to the

Tahsildar to effect correction in the survey sketch, including by WPC 16130/2021

allotment of sub division numbers. However, in Ext.P11, what

has been done is to virtually write a fresh order, but without

referring to any of the earlier reports, which have been

produced by the petitioner on record, namely Exts.P4 and P12.

6. I, therefore, find some merit in the submissions of

the petitioner, because when Exts.P4 and P12 are taken and

read together, one can possibly conclude that the issues with

respect to his property has already been decided and settled

earlier. However, this may not be misunderstood to mean that

this is my affirmative finding, but that, prima facie, such an

impression can be drawn on such lines.

7. In the aforesaid circumstances, I am of the firm

opinion that the matter will be require to be considered by the

Tahsildar himself, since, I find that Ext.P11 has been issued

without properly adverting to the directions in Ext.P10 and

without considering the impact of Exts.P4 and P12 reports.

8. Resultantly, I allow this writ petition and set aside

Ext.P11; with a consequential direction to the seventh

respondent - Tahsildar, to reconsider the matter strictly in WPC 16130/2021

terms of the directions in Ext.P10 order of this Court and after

adverting to Exts.P4 and P12 reports.

9. The afore exercise shall be completed by the

seventh respondent - Tahsildar, as expeditiously as is possible,

but not later than three months from the date of receipt of a

copy of this judgment, after affording a fresh opportunity of

being heard to the petitioner.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

Sd/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN, JUDGE jg WPC 16130/2021

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16130/2021

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF SALE DEED NO.629 OF 1987 DATED 30.4.1987 OF ARAKULAM SRO.

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.359/12 DATED 23.11.2012 OF VILLAGE OFFICER, KANJIKUZHI.

Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 24.7.2013 SUBMITTED FOR THE PETITIONER TO 5TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.K4-8663/12 DATED 31.1.2014 OF ADDL. TAHSILDHAR TO 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.K4-8663 DATED 27.3.2014 OF ADDL. TAHSILDAR TO 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.C4-7552/16 DATED 16.11.2016 ISSUED BY GRAMA PANCHAYATH IDUKKI- KANJIKUZHI.

Exhibit P7 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED 14.11.2018 SUBMITTED FOR PETITIONER TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO.H2 8663/12 DATED 18.12.2018 ISSUED BY TAHSILDHAR IDUKKI.

Exhibit P9 TRUE COPY OF APPLICATION FOR PATTA DATED 18.12.2018 SUBMITTED BEFORE 4TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P10 TRUE COPY OF ORDER DATED 18.12.2019 IN WP(C) NO.18364 OF 2019.

WPC 16130/2021

Exhibit P11 TRUE COPY OF ORDER NO.H2-8663/12 DATED 23.11.2020 ISSUED BY 7TH RESPONDENT.

Exhibit P12 TRUE COPY OF REPORT NO.K4-8663/12 DATED 17.12.2013 FROM THE OFFICE OF ADDL.

TAHSILDHAR, THODUPUZHA TO DISTRICT COLLECTOR, IDUKKI.