Citation : 2022 Latest Caselaw 6093 Ker
Judgement Date : 1 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
WEDNESDAY, THE 1ST DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 11TH JYAISHTA, 1944
CON.CASE(C) NO. 1207 OF 2021
PETITIONERS:
1 VARKEY CHAKKALAYIL,
AGED 70 YEARS
S/O MATHAI, AGED 70 YEARS, CHAKKALAYIL HOUSE,
KODENCHERY P.O., KOZHIKODE DISTRICT, PIN- 673 504
2 JOLLY @ DOMINIC
S/O JOSEPH, AGED 67 YEARS, THEKKEKKARA HOUSE,
INGAPUZHA P.O., THAMARASSERY VIA, KOZHIKODE DISTRICT,
PIN- 673 504
BY ADVS.
BABU JOSEPH KURUVATHAZHA
M.G.SREEJITH
ARCHANA K.S
RESPONDENTS:
1 RAJESH KUMAR SINHA IAS
AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER ARE NO KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONERS,
WORKING AS SECRETARY TO GOVERNMENT,
DEPARTMENT OF FOREST AND WILD LIFE,
GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 001
2 RAJESH RAVINDRAN IFS
AGE AND NAME OF THE FATHER ARE NOT KNOWN TO THE
PETITIONERS,
WORKING AS CUSTODIAN OF ECOLOGICALLY FRAGILE LANDS,
FOREST HEADQUARTERS, VAZHUTHACAUD,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM- 695 014
SRI.NAGARAJ NARAYANAN SPL.GP (FOREST)
THIS CONTEMPT OF COURT CASE (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 01.06.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
CON.CASE(C) NO.1207 OF 2021
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 1st day of June, 2022
This Court, by judgment dated 02.02.2021 in W.P.(C)
No.42528 of 2018, directed the respondents to handover
possession of the land in question to the petitioners within a
period of four months.
2. As the respondents did not comply with the said
direction, the petitioners filed this Contempt of Court Case.
3. The 2nd respondent filed an affidavit dated
05.02.2022. In the affidavit, the 2 nd respondent has stated that
though the petitioners were intimated that land is being
restored and the land was sought to be formally handed over
by proper notice, the petitioners have refused to take over the
land stating that the Forest Department is not handing over
another piece of forest land which they need as a way. CON.CASE(C) NO.1207 OF 2021
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners submitted
that unless access to the property is granted, the direction
given by this Court in the judgment dated 02.02.2021, would
become meaningless.
5. This Court finds that the question of right to
pathway/access was not an issue involved in
W.P.(C) No.42528 of 2018. The learned counsel for the
petitioners pointed out that this is an issue of deemed vesting
of the property. Therefore, when the Tribunal found that the
property has not been vested with the respondents, naturally
the access to the property available to the petitioners should
be maintained. This Court finds that this is not an issue to be
decided in this Contempt of Court Case. The petitioners will be
at liberty to agitate their rights, if any, through appropriate
proceedings.
6. As regards the Contempt of Court Case is
concerned, the respondents are ready to handover possession CON.CASE(C) NO.1207 OF 2021
to the petitioners, if the petitioners approach the respondents.
In view of the stand so taken, this Court does not find
any reason to proceed with the Contempt of Court Case. The
Contempt of Court Case is therefore closed.
sd/-
N.NAGARESH JUDGE hmh CON.CASE(C) NO.1207 OF 2021
APPENDIX OF CON.CASE(C) 1207/2021
PETITIONER ANNEXURES Annexure A1 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 2-2-
2021 OF THIS HON'BLE COURT IN WP(C) NO. 42528/2018 RESPONDENT ANNEXURES ANNEXURE R2(A) TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 26.05.2021 ISSUED TO THE ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF SURVEY, KOZHIKODE ANNEXURE R2(B) TRUE COPY OF LETTER NO.A2-817/2021 DATED 23.06.2021 ANNEXURE R1(A) TRUE COPY OF THE DE-NOTIFICATION SCHEDULE NO.EFL 1-111/2022 DATED 03.02.2022 ANNEXURE R1(B) TRUE COPY OF THE PROCEEDINGS ORDER NO..EFL 1-111/2022 DATED 03.02.2022
Publish Your Article
Campus Ambassador
Media Partner
Campus Buzz
LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026
LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!