Muhammed Abdul Nasar vs Shaji Joseph
2022 Latest Caselaw 12539 Ker

          IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                           PRESENT
            THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
  FRIDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF DECEMBER 2022 / 2ND POUSHA, 1944
                CON.CASE(C) NO. 2530 OF 2022
               AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN
          WP(C) 27267/2022 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
PETITIONER/PETITIONER IN WPC:

          MUHAMMED ABDUL NASAR
          AGED 62 YEARS
          S/O UNNEEN, IDUVAMMAN HOUSE
          PONNAYAKURUSSI P.O
          MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679322.
          PIN - 679322
          BY ADVS.
          K.I.SAGEER
          MUHAMMED YASIL


RESPONDENT/2ND RESPONDENT IN WPC:

          SHAJI JOSEPH
          AGE AND FATHERS NAME NOT KNOWN TO THE PETITIONER
          TAHSILDAR, LAND RECORDS
          PERINTHALMANNA TALUK, TALUK OFFICE
          PERINTHALMANNA,MALAPPURAM-679332., PIN - 679332


          SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN SR GP


     THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 23.12.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
 Con.Case(C) No.2530 of 2022

                                 2




                              JUDGMENT

Dated this the 23rd day of December, 2022

This Court disposed of the writ petition directing the

2nd respondent-Tahsildar to consider Ext.P3 Form-A application

submitted by the petitioner in accordance with law and pass

appropriate orders thereon.

2. Counsel for the contempt petitioner submits that

instead of considering the application as directed by this Court,

the Tahsildar has directed the petitioner to invoke the provisions

of the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act,

2008. Therefore, the communication now issued amounts to

contempt of court.

3. Government Pleader pointed out that pursuant to the

direction of this Court, a hearing was conducted. The petitioner

was heard. Argument notes submitted by the petitioner was

taken into account and a detailed speaking order has been Con.Case(C) No.2530 of 2022

passed.

4. I have perused the order dated 05.11.2022 passed

by the respondent pursuant to the judgment of this Court. The

Tahsildar has considered the application in detail and passed

order after hearing the petitioner. If the petitioner is aggrieved

by that order, the petitioner will have to challenge the order

through appropriate proceedings. I find that the directions of this

Court in W.P.(C) No.27267 of 2022 are substantially complied

with.

Accordingly, the Contempt of Court Case is dismissed

granting liberty to the petitioner to challenge the order passed

by the Tahsildar.

Sd/-

N.NAGARESH JUDGE spk Con.Case(C) No.2530 of 2022

APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 2530/2022

PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure-A1 A CERTIFIED COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 24.08.2022 IN WP(C) NO. 27267/2022 Annexure-A2 A TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 05.11.2022 OF THE RESPONDENT

RESPONDENT'S/S ANNEXURES : NIL