Kerala High Court
Gopinadhan Nair vs State Of Kerala on 23 September, 2021
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. 19849 OF 2021
PETITIONER:
GOPINADHAN NAIR, AGED 77 YEARS,
S/O. GOPALA PILLAI, RESIDING AT LEKSHMI VILASOM,
PANACHIPPARA KARA, POONJAR NADUBHAGOM VILLAGE,
MEENACHIL TALUK, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT.
BY ADV P.C.HARIDAS
RESPONDENTS:
1 STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
COLLECTORATE, KOTTAYAM - 686 001.
3 DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT,
KOTTAYAM, COLLECTORATE KOTTAYAM -686 001.
4 THE TAHSILDAR MEENACHIL,
CIVIL STATION, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 575.
5 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF RESURVEY,
CIVIL STATION, PALA, KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 575.
6 THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
POONJAR NADUBHAGOM VILLAGE, POONJAR P.O.,
KOTTAYAM DISTRICT - 686 581.
BY ADV.SMT. AMMINIKUTTY - SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
23.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 19849 OF 2021
-2-
JUDGMENT
The petitioner has approached this Court with
a singular plea that the 2nd respondent - District
Collector, be directed to take up Ext.P7
representation and dispose it of within a time
frame to be fixed by this Court.
2. The petitioner says that certain extents
of property owned by him have been incorrectly
included in resurvey No.93/10 in Block No.68, and
that it has to be corrected; but that since no
action was taken thereon, he was constrained to
approach the 2nd respondent with Ext.P7
representation. He, therefore, prays that the said
Authority be directed to take an apposite decision
thereon without any further delay.
3. However, the learned Senior Government
Pleader - Smt.K.Amminikutty, submitted that the
competent Authority to accede to the request of
WP(C) NO. 19849 OF 2021
the petitioner is not the 2nd respondent - District
Collector, but the jurisdictional Tahsildar(Land
Reforms). She submitted that, therefore, if the
petitioner makes a proper representation before
the said Authority, the same can be disposed of in
terms of law, without any avoidable delay.
4. On hearing the learned Senior Government
Pleader as afore, Sri.P.C.Haridas - learned
counsel for the petitioner, prayed that his client
be given liberty to approach the jurisdictional
Tahsildar (Land Reforms), and sought a direction
to the said Authority to dispose of such request
without any delay.
5. Taking note of the afore submissions, I
dispose of this writ petition, granting liberty to
the petitioner to move an appropriate application
before the jurisdictional Tahsildar(Land Reforms);
and if this is done within a period of two weeks
from the date of receipt of a copy of this
WP(C) NO. 19849 OF 2021
judgment, the same will be considered by the said
Authority, after following due procedure and
affording necessary opportunity of being heard to
the petitioner, as also any other person who may
be interested - either physically or through video
conferencing - thus culminating in an appropriate
order thereon, as expeditiously as is possible,
but not later than three months from the date on
which such application received by him.
Sd/-
DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
JUDGE
akv
WP(C) NO. 19849 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 19849/2021
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE SALE DEED NO. 1426/1987 OF POONJAR
SRO.,
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF COMMUNICATION OF THE 5TH
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF REPRESENTATION DATED
20.08.1998 OF THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED
24/08/1998 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF NOTICE DATED 11.09.1998
ISSUED BY THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS DATED
09/10/1998 OF THE 5TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED
22/03/2017 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
TO THE 2ND RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENT'S/S EXHIBITS : NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE
