Rani Shaji vs The State Of Kerala
2022 Latest Caselaw 6677 Ker

        IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
      THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
 THURSDAY, THE 9TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 19TH JYAISHTA, 1944
                    WP(C) NO. 9856 OF 2022
PETITIONER/S:

            RANI SHAJI, AGED 35 YEARS
            W/O SHAJI, PADALUNKAL HOUSE, ALADI KARA,
            UPPUTHARA VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI
            DISTRICT
            BY ADV BIJU .C. ABRAHAM
RESPONDENT/S:
    1    THE STATE OF KERALA
         REPRESENTED BY THE PRINCIPAL SECRETARY TO
         GOVERNMENT, REVENUE DEPARTMENT, GOVERNMENT
         SECRETARIAT, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 001
    2    THE STATE SPECIAL OFFICER & COLLECTOR,
         GOVERNMENT LAND RESUMPTION, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-
         695 001.
    3    THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
         IDUKKI DISTRICT, COLLECTORATE, IDUKKI-685 603.
    4    THE TAHSILDAR,
         PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 538
    5    THE VILLAGE OFFICER,
         UPPUTHARA VILLAGE, PEERMADE TALUK, IDUKKI
         DISTRICT-685 505
    6    UPPUTHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
         UPPUTHARA P.O.IDUKKI DISTRICT-685 505,
         REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY
    7    THE SECRETARY,
         UPPUTHARA GRAMA PANCHAYAT, UPPUTHARA P.O.IDUKKI
         DISTRICT-685 505
OTHER PRESENT:
         SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP
     THIS    WRIT   PETITION     (CIVIL)    HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   09.06.2022,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
                                                     -2-
W.P.(C). No. 9856 of 2022



                            P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                            ======================================================

                              W.P.(C) No. 9856 of 2022
                        =============================================================

                     Dated this the 9th day of June, 2022

                                         JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers:

"i) To issue a writ of certiorari quashing Exts.P4 & P5 as illegal and arbitrary.

ii) To issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ or order directing the 6 th respondent to reconsider the application of the petitioner and issue building permit to the petitioner in the light of Ext.P3 judgment passed by this Hon'ble Court.

iii) Grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem just and proper in the interest of justice, including costs."

2. The main prayer is against Exts.P4 and P5 orders

issued by the Panchayat and the Tahsildar. The grievance of the

petitioner is that even though specific directions are issued by

this Court in Ext.P3 judgment, Exts.P4 and P5 are issued

flouting the directions of this Court. Hence, this writ petition is

filed.

W.P.(C). No. 9856 of 2022

3. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the

learned Government Pleader.

4. The counsel for the petitioner submitted that this

Court considered all the aspects and delivered Ext.P3 judgment

in which it is clearly stated in paragraph 8 that the Village

Officer in all those cases should immediately take up the

request made by the petitioners for issuance of revenue

certificates like possession certificate, location sketch, ROR

certificate etc., and will issue the same, to the petitioners. In

such circumstances, Exts.P4 and P5 are unsustainable.

5. The learned Government Pleader, on the other hand,

submitted that there is a Government Order directing all the

District Collectors to file a suit against the persons, who obtain

possession of the property from Peerumedu Tea company.

6. After hearing both sides, I think the stand taken by

the respondents cannot be accepted. This Court considered all

W.P.(C). No. 9856 of 2022

the aspects and thereafter passed Ext.P3 judgment. The

Government Order mentioned by the Government Pleader is

also considered in Ext.P3 judgment. Moreover, subsequent to

that this Court in judgment dated 08.09.2021 in WP(C) No.

16908 of 2021 also passed similar orders clarifying that the

directions issued by this Court will subject to any adjudication

of the title of the petitioners in a civil suit, if any, instituted by

State of Kerala and its competent authorities. Such an order can

be passed in this case also.

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed.

1. Exts.P4 and P5 are set aside.

2. Respondents 6 and 7 are directed to reconsider the matter and consider the application for building permit, if any submitted, in accordance to law, and in the light of the observation in Ext.P3 judgment and in the judgment dated 8.09.2021 in WP(C) No.16908 of 2021.

W.P.(C). No. 9856 of 2022

3. It is clarified that the directions issued in this judgment, will be subject to any adjudication of the title of the petitioners, in a civil suit, if any instituted by the State of Kerala and its competent authorities.

4. The petitioner's application for building permit shall not be rejected for the reasons stated in Exts.P4 and P5 and should be allowed, if it is otherwise in order.

5. The petitioner will produce a copy of this writ petition together with a certified copy of this judgment before the respondents for compliance.

sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE das

W.P.(C). No. 9856 of 2022

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 9856/2022

PETITIONER EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF THE SALE DEED NO 1094/2004 DATED 30.3.2004 OF PEERMADE SRO Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT EVIDENCING PAYMENT OF BASIC TAX FOR THE YEAR 2021-22 Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED 31.1.2019 PASSED BY THIS NHON'BLE COURT IN WPC NO 2819/2019 Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REJECTION LETTER DATED 8.12.2022 ISSUED BY THE 6TH RESPONDENT Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER ISSUED BY THE TAHSILDAR PEERMADE TO THE 6TH RESPONDENT