Sasikala vs Special Tahsildar (L.R)
2022 Latest Caselaw 4622 Ker

                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                  THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
       FRIDAY, THE 22ND DAY OF APRIL 2022 / 2ND VAISAKHA, 1944
                         WP(C) NO. 13858 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

              SASIKALA,
              AGED 61 YEARS,
              W/O. SASEENDRAN, SASTHA NIVAS, KAMMANTHARA,
              KIZHAKKENCHERRY-1 VILLAGE, ALATHUR, PALAKKAD 678 683

              BY ADV V.A.JOHNSON (VARIKKAPPALLIL)



RESPONDENT:

              SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.R),
              OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (L.R), MINI CIVIL
              STATION, OTTAPALAM, PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD-679 104.


OTHER PRESENT:

              GP RAJEEV JYOTHISH GEORGE




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
22.04.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.13858 of 2022                2

                        VIJU ABRAHAM,J
                   ---------------------------------
                  W.P.(C).No.13858 of 2022
                 -------------------------------------
             Dated this the 22nd day of April, 2022

                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner, who is stated to be a senior citizen of over

61 years in age, has approached this Court alleging that, even

though a suo motu proceedings has been initiated against her

by the respondent Special Tahsildar (Land Reforms) and

numbered as S.M.No.986 of 2021, further action thereon has

not been completed until now. The petitioner, therefore, prays

the 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,

submitted that, if the suo motu proceedings are still pending

against the petitioner, the same can be disposed of by the

respondent, within a period of eight months, taking note of the

fact that she is a senior citizen. He, 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.986 of 2021 is still pending against the

petitioner, then it will require to be disposed of by the

respondent within a period of eight 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

respondent to complete proceedings in S.M.No.986 of 2021,

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 eight months from the date of receipt of a certified

copy of this judgment.

Though there is no specific averment regarding the

involvement of any Devaswom Board in the S.M. Proceedings,

it is made clear that if the competent Authority is to find so,

then the said entity will also be given an opportunity of being

heard while the afore directed exercise is completed.

sd/-

VIJU ABRAHAM, JUDGE pm

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 13858/2022

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT ISSUED IN S.M NO 986/2021 BY THE RESPONDENT DATED 29-10-

Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE AADHAAR CARD NO 9720 7076 0767 OF THE PETITIONER.