Kerala High Court
Francis Joseph vs The Revenue Divisional Officer on 28 June, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 12171 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
FRANCIS JOSEPH
AGED 65 YEARS
S/O.OUSEPH, 1/408, KUTTUR P.O.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 013.
BY ADV BINOY VASUDEVAN
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE RDO, CIVIL STATION,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR - 680 003.
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
KUTTUR VILLAGE, KUTTUR P.O.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 013.
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER
KRISHI BHAVAN, KOLAZHY GRAMA PANCHAYAT,
KOLAZHY P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT - 680 010.
OTHER PRESENT:
SMT.VIDYA KURIAKOSE, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28.06.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).12444/2022, THE COURT ON THE
SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.12171 & 12444 of 2022
2
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
TUESDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2022 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 12444 OF 2022
PETITIONER:
FRANCIS JOSEPH,
AGED 65 YEARS
S/O.OUSEPH, 1/408, KUTTUR P.O.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 013.
BY ADVS.
BINOY VASUDEVAN
SREEJITH SREENATH
RINCY KHADER
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER,
OFFICE OF THE RDO, CIVIL STATION,
AYYANTHOLE, THRISSUR-680 003.
2 THE VILLAGE OFFICER, KUTTUR VILLAGE,
KUTTUR P.O., THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 013.
3 THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER,
KOLAZHY GRAMA PANCHAAYT, KOLAZHY P.O.,
THRISSUR DISTRICT-680 010.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 28.06.2022, ALONG WITH WP(C).12171/2022,
THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C).No.12171 & 12444 of 2022
3
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
--------------------------------
W.P.(C).Nos.12171 & 12444 of 2022
----------------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of June, 2022
JUDGMENT
These writ petitions are connected and therefore, I am
disposing these writ petitions by a common judgment. I will
narrate the facts in W.P.(C). No.12171 of 2022.
2. The petitioner herein is the absolute owner in
possession of a parcel of land covered by Ext.P1 document.
The property was purchased by him in the year 2010.
According to the petitioner, the property is a pucca dry land
and it was never cultivated with paddy. It is stated that there
is no paddy cultivation in the neighbouring properties as well.
Petitioner preferred an application in Form No.5 before the 1 st
respondent. In view of the urgency he approached this Court
and by Ext.P3 judgment dated 23-03-2021 this Court was
pleased to direct the 1st respondent to dispose of the
application within a period of two months. Thereafter
respondents 2 and 3 had forwarded reports to the 1 st
W.P.(C).No.12171 & 12444 of 2022
respondent, which, according to the petitioner, are
contradictory. The statutory Rules under the Act also
contemplates that the report of the Kerala State Remote
Sensing and Environment Centre, Thiruvananthapuram
(KSRSEC) has to be obtained before passing final orders on an
application in Form No.5. Accordingly the petitioner preferred
Ext.P4 request on 09-11-2021. Since no action was taken, the
petitioner approached this Court by preferring W.P.(C)
No.28279 of 2021. This Court, after hearing the learned
Government Pleader, disposed of the writ petition directing
the 1st respondent to call for a report from the KSREC before
passing final orders in Form No.5. It is the case of the
petitioner that to circumvent the judgment, an order pre dated
was issued and communicated to the petitioner through the
Village Officer. Ext.P6 is the order. Aggrieved by the same,
this writ petition is filed. The same is the facts in W.P.(C).
12444 of 2022. Ext.P6 is the impugned order in W.P.(C).
No.12444 of 2022. The petitioner in both these writ petitions
are same and the properties covered in these writ petitions
are adjacent properties.
3. This Court perused Ext.P5 judgment and P6 order.
W.P.(C).No.12171 & 12444 of 2022
Ext.P6 order in not in accordance to the directions of this
Court in Ext.P5 judgment. I am of the opinion that Ext.P6 is to
be set aside and the matter is to be considered after getting
report from the KSREC.
Therefore, these writ petitions are allowed in the
following manner:
1. Ext.P6 in W.P.(C). No.12171 of 2022 and W.P.
(C). No.12444 of 2022 are set aside.
2. The 1st respondent in both these writ petitions
are directed to reconsider the matter strictly in
accordance to the directions in Ext.P5
judgments, as expeditiously as possible, at any
rate, within two months from the date of
receipt of a copy of this judgment.
sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JV JUDGE
W.P.(C).No.12171 & 12444 of 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12444/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2993/2010 OF
SRO AYYANTHOLE DATED 19.08.2010.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT IN FORM NO.5 DATED
12.03.2021.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDMGNET DATED
23.03.2021 IN WPC NO.7418 OF 2021.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED
09.11.2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
23.12.2021 IN WPC NO.28296 OF 2021.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D1-
4941/2021/SPL. DATED 03.11.2021 ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
W.P.(C).No.12171 & 12444 of 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 12171/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
Exhibit P1 TRUE COPY OF DOCUMENT NO.2994/2010 OF
S.R.O.AYYANTHOLE DATED 20/08/2010.
Exhibit P2 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED
BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 1ST
RESPONDENT IN FORM NO.5 DATED
12/03/2021.
Exhibit P3 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
23/03/2021 IN WP(C) NO.7479 OF 2021.
Exhibit P4 TRUE COPY OF THE REQUEST DATED
09/11/2021 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER
BEFORE THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
Exhibit P5 TRUE COPY OF THE JUDGMENT DATED
23/12/2021 IN WP(C) NO.28279 OF 2021.
Exhibit P6 TRUE COPY OF THE ORDER NO.D1-
4941/2021/SPL. DATED 03/11/2021 ISSUED
BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT.
