Suma V.P vs State Of Kerala And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 20081 Ker

                IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SHAJI P.CHALY
     FRIDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER 2021 / 2ND ASWINA, 1943
                        WP(C) NO. 25738 OF 2010
PETITIONER/S:

          SUMA V.P., AGED 57,
          W/O.SATHYANANTHAN.A.P., CHITHRA HOUSE,, MOKEN P.O.,
          KAKKATTIL, VADAKARA TALUK,, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

          BY ADV SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)



RESPONDENT/S:

    1     STATE OF KERALA REPRESENTED BY
          THE SECRETARY TO GOVT., REVENUE DEPARTMENT,
          SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM.

    2     THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR KOZHIKODE.

    3     THE TAHSILDAR TALUK OFFICE
          VADAKARA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT.

    4     THE VILLAGE OFFICER KAYAKKODI VILLAGE
          VADAKARA TALUK, KOZHIKODE.




          BY SMT.SONY.K.B,GOVERNMENT PLEADER




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.09.2021, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 25738 OF 2010
                                           -2-



                                  JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed by the petitioner seeking the following reliefs:-

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or any other writ order or direction, directing respondents 3 and 4 to accept the land tax in respect of 4 acres of land in Sy.No. 105 of Kayyakkodi village and to issue proper receipt to the petitioner and permit her to do all developmental activities in the said land.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus directing respondents 3 and 4 to issue proper proceedings if any restraining them from accepting land tax of the properties of the petitioner.

(iii) Issue a writ of prohibition prohibiting all revenue authorities from interfering with the peaceful possession and enjoyment of 4 acres of land in Sy.No.105 of Kaakkodi village by the petitioner and her men."

2. Petitioner is alleged to be the owner and title holder of 4 acres of

landed property comprised in old Sy.No.105 of Kayyakkodi village, Vadakara

Taluk, Kozhikode district, by virtue of sale deed Nos.638/83 and 716/83 of

the Office of the Sub Registrar, Kavilumpara. According to the petitioner, the

vendor of the property had obtained 'pattayam' as per Ext.P1 from the Land WP(C) NO. 25738 OF 2010

Tribunal-III, Kunnummel. All the surrounding lands are revenue land and in

possession and enjoyment of various parties. Case of the petitioner is that,

mutation of the property was effected and land tax was accepted from the

petitioner from the financial year 1984-1985 to 1993-1994. However,

thereafter, the tax was not accepted by the revenue authorities for reasons

known to them. Being confronted with such a situation, petitioner has

submitted Ext.P4 before the 3rd respondent, i.e., The Tahsildar, Taluk Office,

Vadakara, Kozhikode district, which was pending consideration, and since no

action was taken, petitioner has approached this Court by filing this writ

petition.

3. The 3rd respondent has filed a counter affidavit, basically contending

that the property is included in the property required for assigning lands in

favour of landless people. It is also pointed out therein that the petitioner has

not taken necessary steps in order to identify the boundaries of the property

and therefore, the Tahsildar is unable to arrive at a definite conclusion with

respect to the property in question.

4. I have heard learned Counsel for the petitioner, Sri. John Joseph and

learned Government Pleader, Smt. Sony K.B., and perused the pleadings and

the documents on record.

5. Apparently, from the documents produced and the pleadings put WP(C) NO. 25738 OF 2010

forth, I am of the view that, a prima facie case is projected by the petitioner,

enabling the petitioner to get Ext.P4 application submitted before the

Tahsildar considered in accordance with law. However, since the Tahsildar

has a case that the petitioner has not made any efforts to identify the

boundary of the properties, the Tahsildar may not be in a position to

undertake the said activity and then sort out the issue projected by the

petitioner in Ext.P4 representation.

6. The writ petition was pending before this Court for the last 11 years

without securing any interim orders. In that view of the matter, I think it is

only appropriate that the writ petition is disposed of with suitable directions.

7. Petitioner is given the liberty to file a suitable application before the

competent authority under the Kerala Surveys and Boundaries Act and the

Rules thereto, within one month from the date of receipt of a copy of this

judgment. If any such application is filed, the said authority shall consider

the same in accordance with law and attain finality after securing

participation of the petitioner. If the petitioner is able to produce necessary

orders from the competent authority under the Kerala Surveys and

Boundaries Act and Rules along with any plan fixing the boundary, the

Tahsildar, i.e., the 3rd respondent, shall consider Ext.P4 application submitted

by the petitioner and arrive at appropriate conclusion in accordance with law, WP(C) NO. 25738 OF 2010

at the earliest and at any rate, within a month from the date of production of

the order form the authority under the Kerala Survey and Boundaries Act and

Rules.

The writ petition is disposed of as above.

Sd/-

SHAJI P.CHALY JUDGE

uu 25.09.2021 WP(C) NO. 25738 OF 2010

APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS:

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE CERTIFIED COPY OF THE ORDER IN O.A.NO.132/1975 OF THE LAND TRIBUNAL-III KUNNUMMEL

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 07/03/1994 ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE LAND TAX RECEIPT DATED 01/03/1994 ISSUED TO THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY OWNER OF THE PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 12/04/2010 SUBMITTED TO THE 3RD RESPONDENT

EXHIBIT P5 A SKETCH SHOWING THE OUTER MEASUREMENT AND BOUNDARIES OF THE PETITIONER PROPERTY