K.Vasudevan vs The Special Tahsildar
2022 Latest Caselaw 1695 Ker

               IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                 PRESENT
                THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE VIJU ABRAHAM
         WEDNESDAY, THE 16TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 27TH MAGHA, 1943
                           WP(C) NO. 23858 OF 2017
PETITIONER:

            K.VASUDEVAN,AGED 81 YEARS, S/O.LATE GOVINDAN, RESIDING AT
            ANURAG, THIRUVANGAD AMSOM AND DESOM, P.O.CHIRAKKARA,
            THALASSERY TALUK, PIN-670104.

            BY ADVS.
            SRI.C.KHALID
            SRI.K.P.MOHAMED SHAFI
            SMT.K.REEHA KHADER
            SRI.T.P.SAJID

RESPONDENTS:

            THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR,
     1
            LAND AQUISITION, KOODALI, KANNUR DISTRICT-670001.

            TALUK TAHSILDAR,
     2      THALASSERY TALUK-670101.

            * ADDL.R3 IS IMPLEADED

  ADDL.R3   "THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, KANNUR" IS IMPLEADED AS PER ORDER
            DATED 16.2.2022 IN I.A.NO.3/2020 IN W.P.(C) NO.23858/2017

OTHER PRESENT:

            SMT.SHINYMOL, GOVT.PLEADER




      THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FGINALLY HEARD ON 16.02.2022, THE COURT
ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(Civil). No.23858 of 2017                                   2




                                     VIJU ABRAHAM, J.
                                ..............................................
                              W.P.(Civil). No.23858 of 2017
                        ...............................................................
                     Dated this the 16th day of February, 2022

                                           JUDGMENT

The petitioner, an octogenarian has approached this Court seeking the following reliefs:

i to issue a writ of mandamus or other writ or directions to the respondents, directing them to reconsider the wrong decision, conduct a site inspection directly or issue a commission for inspect the land in question and report whether it is a submergible area of the Pazhasi Dam Project or not.

ii. To pass an interim order to appoint an Advocate Commissioner in consultation the respondent's Counsel, from Thalassery or Mattannur Bar, at the expense of this petitioner, for inspecting the property.

iii. To grant such other reliefs as may be deemed just and proper.

2. The case of the petitioner is that 0.0338 hectares of land comprised in

Resurvey No. 128/5 of Keezhoor Village, Thalassery Taluk was acquired by

the Government for the implementation of the Pazhasi Dam project. It is the

contention of the petitioner that the said land which is lying sandwiched

between two multi-storeyed buildings i.e., Kalpaka Complex and Iritty Co-

operative Society is lying unutilized since 1977. The case of the petitioner is

that similarly situated land owned by V.P. Kelu Master and V.P. Narayanan

which was acquired for the above said project was also lying unutilized and

based on their application for reconveyance of land, the 3rd respondent as per

Exhibit P1 proceedings granted sanction for reconveyance of an extent of

0.0879 hectares of land in R.S. No. 132/3B and an extent of 0.0679 hectares of

land in R.S. No. 132/7 of Pazhassi Amsom, Mattanur Desom to them. The

petitioner claiming to be similarly situated made a request before the 3rd

respondent, District Collector, for reconveyance of the land having an extent of

0.0338 hectares of land comprised in resurvey no. 128/5 of Keezhoor Village,

Thalassery Taluk which was acquired by the Government for the

implementation of the Pazhasi Dam project and lying unutilized. The said

request was rejected by the 3rd respondent as per Exhibit P4 communication

dated 08.09.2016 for the reason that the said land is part of the reservoir and is

in a submersible area.

3. It is the contention of the petitioner that the said stand taken by the 3rd

respondent in Exhibit P4 is without any basis. The property of the petitioner is

lying in between two multi-storeyed buildings and is very close to the

Thalassery-Iritty Road and Iritty Bazar and is almost 10 km away from the

Pazhasi Dam. Petitioner also contended that he has been discriminated in the

matter of reconveyance of unutilized land acquired for the dam project in as

much as in the case of similarly situated persons, orders have been issued for

reconveyance of the unutilized land as is evident from Exhibit P1. The

petitioner has a further case that in the said reconveyed land, huge multi-

storeyed building complexes have been constructed. Petitioner claims that

Exhibit P5 judgment of this Court in W.P.C. No. 34904 of 2018 is issued in a

similar circumstance and he is entitled for a similar treatment. In view of the

above, the petitioner again approached the District Collector by filing Exhibit

P6 representation dated 01.10.2020 requesting to reconsider Exhibit P4 order

taking into consideration Exhibit P1 order of reconveyance of land issued in

favour of similarly situated persons and also Exhibit P5 judgment of this court

in W.P.C. No. 34904 of 2018. The petitioner contends that the said land is the

only property owned by him and he has serious health problems and his family

is living in acute penury and therefore he is approaching the 3rd respondent

with a request to reconsider Exhibit P4 order. Exhibit P4 is a cryptic order

without taking into consideration any of the contention raised by the petitioner.

Therefore, I feel that the issue must be reconsidered by the 3rd respondent,

District Collector, taking into consideration the various contentions raised by

the petitioner in Exhibit P6 representation dated 01.10.2020. To facilitate a

proper reconsideration of the matter, I set aside Exhibit P4 order dated

08.09.2016 passed by the 3rd respondent, with a consequential direction to the

3rd respondent, District Collector, to consider and pass orders on Exhibit P6

representation within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of a copy of

the judgment after affording an opportunity of being heard to the petitioner or

his authorized representative.

With the above said directions, the writ petition is disposed of.

Sd/-

VIJU ABRAHAM,JUDGE

pm

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23858/2017

PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF DISTRICT COLLECTOR EXHIBIT P1 CANNANORE DATED 08-10-1986.

THE COPY OF THE REPORT, FILED BY THE EXECUTIVES ENGINEER BEFORE KERALA LOKAYUKTHA AS A COMPLAINT EXHIBIT P2 BY THE PETITIONER'S DAUGHTER HONEY VASUDEVAN DATED 07-01-2014.

THE COPY OF THE PETITION FILED BY THE PETITIONER EXHIBIT P3 BEFORE THE HON'BLE CHIEF MINISTER OF KERALA AND HON'BLE REVENUE MINISTER OF KERALA DATED 05-08-2016.

TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR EXHIBIT P4 KANNUR DATED 8/9/2016

TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGEMENT DATED 26/8/2020 IN WPC EXHIBIT P5 NO.34904/2018

TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DATED 1/10/2020 EXHIBIT P6 SUBMITTED BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,KANNUR