P.P.Mahroof vs Chelsasini V
2022 Latest Caselaw 4338 Ker

                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ALEXANDER THOMAS
         Thursday, the 7th day of April 2022 / 17th Chaithra, 1944
              CON.CASE(C) NO. 2214 OF 2021IN WP(C) 5777/2020

PETITIONER/1ST PETITIONER:


     P.P.MAHROOF, AGED 44 YEARS, S/O. MAMMED KOYA, DARUL MASOOD, MAITHRI
     ROAD, THIRUVANNUR P.O., PANNIYANKARA , KOZHIKODE DISTRICT

    BY ADVOCATES M/S. M. SASINDRAN, P.K. SUBHASH
RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT:

     CHELSASINI V., REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER, KOZHIKODE,PIN - 673 001

      BY SRI. SAIGI JACOB PALATTY, SENIOR GOVERNMENT PLEADER

     This Contempt of court case (civil) having come up for orders on
07.04.2022, the court on the same day passed the following:

                                                                     P.T.O.
                       ALEXANDER THOMAS, J.
               -----------------------------------------------------
            Contempt of Court Case (Civil) No.2214 of 2021
           [arising out of judgment dated 27.02.2020 in W.P.(C) No.5777/2020]
                    --------------------------------------------
                      Dated this the 07th day of April, 2022


                                    ORDER

Sri. Saigi Jacob Palatty, learned Senior Government Pleader

would submit on the basis of instructions that the respondent RDO, has

now passed orders on 18.01.2022, rejecting the request of the petitioner

in Form V application for exclusion of the subject property from the

Land Data Bank, etc.

2. Sri. M. Sasidran, learned counsel appearing for the

petitioner would submit that the said decision of the respondent officer,

is in patent violation of the dictum laid down by the Division Bench of

this Court in Mather Nagar Residents Association v. District

Collector [2020(2) KLT 192(DB)], etc. The learned Senior

Government Pleader submits that short time may be granted to him to

get instructions and that after due examination, if necessary, he would

give appropriate and strict directives and institutions to the RDO to

re-call the present rejection order and to pass fresh orders in the light of

the dictum laid down by the Division Bench in the aforecited decision,

etc.

The abovesaid submission on behalf of both sides are recorded.

List on 01.06.2022.

Hand Over a copy of this order to both sides.

Sd/-

ALEXANDER THOMAS, JUDGE Skk//11042021

07-04-2022 /True Copy/ Assistant Registrar