Chandrababu E vs The Special Tahsildar (Land ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 2206 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                              PRESENT
          THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN
   THURSDAY, THE 24TH DAY OF FEBRUARY 2022 / 5TH PHALGUNA, 1943
                       WP(C) NO. 6314 OF 2022
PETITIONER:

          CHANDRABABU E
          AGED 45 YEARS
          S/O.EACHARAN, ARIYAKODE, ERIMAYUR,
          ALATHOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 678546.

          BY ADVS.
          D.KISHORE
          MEERA GOPINATH
          R.MURALEEKRISHNAN (MALAKKARA)
          ARYA JOSEPH



RESPONDENT:

    1     SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND REFORMS)
          OFFICE OF THE SPECIAL TAHSILDAR - PATTAMBI, MINI CIVIL
          STATION, OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD-679104.

    2     THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ERIMAYUR NO.1,
          ALATHOOR TALUK, PALAKKAD, PIN 678546.


OTHER PRESENT:

          SMT. MABLE .C .KURIAN SR.G.P




     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
24.02.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 6314 OF 2022              2

                               JUDGMENT

The petitioner has approached this Court

asserting that a suo motu proceedings, bearing

S.M.No.1133 of 2021 has been initiated against him

by the 1st respondent - Special Tahsildar (Land

Reforms); and seeks that the same be directed to be

disposed of within a time frame to be fixed by this

Court.

2. In response, the learned Senior Government

Pleader, Smt.Mable C.Kurian, submitted that the

afore mentioned suo motu proceedings was initiated

against the petitioner only in November, 2021 and

therefore, that this writ petition is premature.

3. When I hear the learned Senior Government

Pleader as afore, it is without doubt that this

Court has been ordering suo motu proceedings to be

disposed of within a time frame. That said, though

this Court normally fixes eighteen months time for

the Competent Authority to complete proceedings, I

am of the view that in this case it will be

justified to expand it to twenty four months, since

the application of the petitioner has been made only

very recently.

Resultantly, this writ petition is ordered,

directing the 1st respondent to complete proceedings

in S.M.No.1133 of 2021, after following due

procedure and after affording necessary opportunity

of being heard to the petitioner - as also any other

interested person - as expeditiously as is possible,

but not later than twenty four 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/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE MC/25.2

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 6314/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 14.5.2021 CERTIFYING THE DEATH OF SMT.PARU, THE MOTHER OF THE PETITIONER

EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE RELATIONSHIP CERTIFICATE ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER ON 12.8.2021 BY THE VILLAGE OFFICER, ERIMAYUR-1, VILLAGE OFFICE.

EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DATED 26.11.2021 ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 24.11.2021 ALONG WITH THE SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS SUBMITTED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 21.1.2022 IN W.P(C)NO.2146/2022 OF THIS HONOURABLE COURT.