Kunhunni vs The District Collector
2022 Latest Caselaw 381 Ker

                     IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM

                                      PRESENT

                   THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN

          THURSDAY, THE 13TH DAY OF JANUARY 2022 / 23RD POUSHA, 1943

                              WP(C) NO. 33331 OF 2014

PETITIONERS:
      1      KUNHUNNI
             AGED 62 YEARS
             S/O. CHATHAPPAN, KALLIKUNNUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PARUTHUR POST,
             PATTAMBI VIA, PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 305.

     2         KALYANI
               AGED 47 YEARS
               W/O. KUNHUNNI, KALLIKUNNUPARAMBIL HOUSE, PARUTHUR POST, PATTAMBI
               VIA, PATTAMBI TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 305.

               BY ADV SRI.P.K.MOHANAN(PALAKKAD)


RESPONDENTS:

     1         THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
               PALAKKAD REVENUE DISTRICT, CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD-678 001.

     2         THE DISTRICT SURVEY SUPERINTENDENT
               CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD-678 001.

     3         THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SURVEY
               RE-SURVEY DEPARTMENT, SHOBHA COMPLEX, PALAKKAD-678 001.

     4         THE TAHSILDAR
               PATTAMBI TALUK, P.O.PATTAMBI, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679 303.

     5         THE VILLAGE OFFICER
               PARUTHUR VILLAGE OFFICE, PARUTHUR POST, PATTAMBI(VIA), PIN-679
               305.

     6         THE TALUK SURVEYOR
               PATTAMBI TALUK OFFICE, P.O.PATTAMBI, PIN-679 303.


OTHER PRESENT:

               SR. GP - SMT.K. AMMINIKUTTY


     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 13.01.2022,

THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 33331 OF 2014

                                     2




                              JUDGMENT

The petitioners say that when the resurvey of their property

was conducted, 34 cents had been found attenuated. They say that,

they have, therefore, preferred Ext.P5 application before the 2 nd

respondent and pray that the same be directed to be taken up and

disposed of, within a time frame to be fixed by this Court.

2. The afore submissions of Sri.P.K.Mohanan - learned

counsel for the petitioners, were answered by the learned Senior

Government Pleader - Smt.K.Amminikutty, saying that, even

though, going by the allegation of the petitioners, the reduction of

the extent of the petitioners' property has been caused on account

of the resurvey, the fact remains that such resurvey was completed

in the year 2015 only. She then added that, however, proceedings

thereon had been initiated several years before and it is possibly

because of this, that the petitioners' property had been reduced,

since it was found that 34 cents in question is part of a 'river

puramboke'.

3. In reply, Sri.P.K.Mohanan - learned counsel for the WP(C) NO. 33331 OF 2014

petitioners, submitted that his clients have filed this writ petition as

early as in the year 2014, even before the resurvey proceedings had

been completed. He submitted that even the counter pleadings filed

on record would not show how his clients' property had been

reduced and accounted as 'river puramboke'. He asserted that, this

is egregiously improper, since they had not been given any

opportunity of being heard, before such an action had been

completed.

4. When I evaluate the afore submissions, it is clear that, on

one side, the petitioners say that their property has been reduced

without following due procedure; while on the other, the official

respondents maintain that this has been done consequent to the

resurvey, which was completed on 19.02.2015.

5. Obviously, therefore, the petitioners now obtains a

remedy of approaching the Special Tahsildar (LR) for correction of

the resurvey records, for which purpose, I am certain that the

petitioners must be given liberty.

Resultantly, I order this writ petition and direct the petitioners

to approach the jurisdictional Tahsildar (LR) with an appropriate

application for correction of the resurvey records; and if this is done WP(C) NO. 33331 OF 2014

within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a copy of

this judgment, the same shall be considered, after affording them an

opportunity of being heard and of producing necessary documents

in substantiation of their plea; thus culminating in an appropriate

order and necessary action thereon, as expeditiously as is possible

but not later than four months from the date on which the said

application is made.

This writ petition is thus ordered.

SD/-

DEVAN RAMACHANDRAN JUDGE rp WP(C) NO. 33331 OF 2014

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 33331/2014

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1 COPY OF THE REGISTERED DOCUMENT NO.462/91 OF SRO, TRITHALA, DTD.21.2.1991 IN TH NAME OF THE FIRST PETITIONER KUNHUNNI.

EXHIBIT P2 COPY OF THE REGISTERED DOCUMENT NO.463/91 OF SRO, TRITHALA DTD.21.2.1991 STANDS IN THE NAME OF 2ND PETITIONER KALYANI.

EXHIBIT P3 COPY OF THE PURCHASE CERTIFICATE DTD.24.5.1976 ISSUED BY THE LAND TRIBUNAL, PATTAMBI IN OA 1866/1972 IN FAVOUR OF MADATHIL VALAPPIL KUNHIAYDROSE, PARUTHUR.

EXHIBIT P4 COPY OF THE POSSESSION CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FAVOUR OF THE 1ST PETITIONER BY VILLAGE OFFICER, PARUTHUR DTD.22.7.2003 WITH RESPECT TO THE PROPERTIES COVERED BY EXT.P1.

EXHIBIT P5 COPY OF THE LAWYER NOTICE DTD.27.8.2013 ISSUED TO RESPONDENTS 1,3 AND 5.

EXHIBIT P6 COPY OF THE REPLY DTD.3.9.2013 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.

EXHIBIT P7 COPY OF THE APPLICATION SENT TO THE RESPONDENTS 4 AND 6 DTD.10.9.2014 BY WAY OF REGISTERED POST ACKNOWLEDGMENT DUE BY THE FIRST PETITIONER.

EXHIBIT P8 A TRUE COPY OF THE REVISION PETITIONER BEFORE THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR, PALAKKAD U/S.13A OF THE KERALA SURVEY AND BOUNDARIES ACT DATED 05.02.2015.