Faisal vs The Revenue Divisional Officer, ...
2022 Latest Caselaw 7298 Ker

            IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
        THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
   THURSDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 2ND ASHADHA, 1944
                     WP(C) NO. 29716 OF 2013
PETITIONERS:

    1       FAISAL
            AGED 51 YEARS
            S/O.MOIDEENKUTTY MOUILAVI,
            R/A.KALATHINGAL HOUSE, KARKIDKAM,
            KADANNAMANNA P O, MANKADA, MALAPPURAM DISTRICT.

            SUPPLEMENTARY PETITIONER WHO IS THE LEGAL HEIR OF
            THE PETITIONER IMPLEADED


    2       SUPPLEMENTARY PETITIONER NO.2.
            NASEEMA.K., W/O. FAISAL KALATHINGAL(LATE)
            AGED 39 YEARS, RESIDING AT KALATHINGAL HOUSE,
            KADANNAMANNA.P.O., MANKADA,
            MALAPPURAM DISTRICT-679324.

            (SUPPLEMENTARY PETITIONER IS IMPLEADED AS PER
            ORDER DATED 15-02-2021 IN WP(C) 29716/2013).
            BY ADVS.
            SRI.U.K.DEVIDAS
            U.K.DEVIDAS

RESPONDENTS:

    1       THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER (SUB COLLECTOR)
            PERINTHALMANNA-679322,
            MALAPPURAM DIST
    2       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR,
             MALAPPURAM-679 506
OTHER PRESENT:

            SMT.DEEPA NARAYANAN, SR.GP


     THIS    WRIT   PETITION    (CIVIL)     HAVING    COME    UP    FOR
ADMISSION    ON   23.06.2022,    THE     COURT   ON   THE    SAME   DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 W.P.(C).No.29716/2013

                                     2




                   P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
                    --------------------------------
                   W.P.(C).No.29716 of 2013
             ----------------------------------------------
            Dated this the 23rd day of June, 2022


                           JUDGMENT

This writ petition is filed with following prayers:

i. A writ of certiorari or any other appropriate writ order or direction calling for the records leading to Exhibits P2 and P4 and quash the Ext.P2 and P4.

ii. Call for the records leading to Ext.P2 and P4 orders and appropriate directions to stay the further proceedings in pursuance of Ext.P2 and P4.

iii. Issue a writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the respondents that reconsider the matter after afford an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within a reasonable time.

iv. A writ of mandamus or any other appropriate writ order or direction to the respondents that drop all proceedings against the property of the petitioner. v. Such other relief's as this Hon'ble Court deems fit to grant in the nature of this case.

(SIC) W.P.(C).No.29716/2013

2. Petitioner is aggrieved by Exts.P2 and P4 orders.

As per Ext.P2, the Sub Collector recommended the matter to

the 2nd respondent to initiate proceedings as per Section 13 of

the Conservation of Paddy Land and Wetland Act, 2008.

Thereafter another proceedings was passed by the Sub

Collector on 02.11.2013. This Court perused Exts.P2 and P4.

Now the counsel for the petitioner produced a document as

Ext.P8. Ext.P8 is the recommendation from the Convener of

Local Level Monitoring Committee to remove the property

from the data bank. In the light of Ext.P8, Exts.P2 and P4 will

not stand. The petitioner is free to file an application under

Clause 6(2) of the Land Utilization Order and there can be a

direction of the Revenue Divisional Officer to consider he

same and pass appropriate orders in the light of Ext.P8.

Therefore, this writ petition is allowed in the following

manner:

1. Exts.P2 and P4 are set aside.

2. The petitioner is free to file an application

under Clause 6(2) of the Land Utilization

Order within three weeks from the date of W.P.(C).No.29716/2013

receipt of a copy of this judgment.

3. Once such an application is received, the 1st

respondent will consider the same in the light

of Ext.P8 and pass appropriate orders in it in

accordance to law, after giving an opportunity

of hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously

as possible, at any rate, within three months

from the date of receipt of the application.

4. Petitioner will produce a copy of this judgment

along with a copy of this writ petition before

the 1st respondent for compliance.

sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JV JUDGE W.P.(C).No.29716/2013

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 29716/2013

PETITIONER EXHIBITS P1:-TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT OF THE PROERTY P2:-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DTD 12/7/2013 P3:-TRUE COPY OF THE RECEIPT DTD 23/10/2013 ISSUED FROM THE OFFICE OF THE 2ND RESPONDENT P4:-TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE FIRST RESPONDENT DTD 2/11/2013 P5:-THE PHOTOGRAPHS OF THE PROPERTY EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE DEATH CERTIFICATE DATED 11/12/2018 ISSUED BY THE PERINTHALMANNA MUNICIPALITY.

EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LEGAL HEIRS SHIP CERTIFICATE DATED 04/04/2019 ISSUED BY THE TALUK OFFICE, PERINTHALMANNA. Exhibit P8 TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT SUBMITTED BY THE AGRICULTURE