Kerala High Court
Kunhalavi vs The Village Officer on 31 May, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE N.NAGARESH
TUESDAY, THE 31ST DAY OF MAY 2022 / 10TH JYAISHTA, 1944
WP(C) NO. 17483 OF 2022
PETITIONER
KUNHALAVI
AGED 65 YEARS
S/O. KUNJAYAMMU, KONTHATHODY HOUSE, PATTISSERY DESOM,
OTTAPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679335
BY ADV BIJU ABRAHAM
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
OFFICE OF THE VILLAGE OFFICE, VANIYAMKULAM,
OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT , PIN - 679101
2 THE LOCAL LEVEL MONITORING COMMITTEE
REPRESENTED BY ITS CONVENER,
THE AGRICULTURAL OFFICER, KRISHI BHAVAN, VANIYAMKULAM,
OTTAPPALAM TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT , PIN - 679522
3 THE REVENUE DIVISIONAL OFFICER
OTTAPPALAM, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN - 679101
SMT.SURYA BINOY SR.GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
31.05.2022, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO.17483 OF 2022
2
JUDGMENT
Dated this the 31st day of May, 2022
The petitioner seeks to command the respondents to
take a decision on Ext.P6 application submitted by the
petitioner based on Ext.P2 within a time fixed by this Court.
2. The petitioner states that he holds 37 Ares 87
Square Meters of property in Old Survey Nos. 84/1-1, 84/8-1
and 84/9-1 of Vaniyamkulam Village in Ottappalam Taluk in
Palakkad District. The 1st respondent-Village Officer reported
that the property is classified as 'Nanja 1' and there are
yielding coconut trees in the property. The petitioner is paying
tax for the said property.
3. All the properties surrounding the petitioner's
property are developed and the adjacent property owners
have constructed buildings. The land of the petitioner is lying
on the same level of PWD road, contends the petitioner.
However, the land has been treated by the respondents as
WP(C) NO.17483 OF 2022
paddy land and is included in Data Bank. The petitioner,
therefore submitted Ext.P6 application invoking Rule 4(d) of
the Kerala Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Rules,
2008, for effecting removal of the property from the Data
Bank. The application has not been disposed of by the
respondents so far. The petitioner therefore seeks appropriate
directions.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader representing the
respondents.
5. The Government Pleader pointed out that in Ext.P6
application, the extent of land shown by the petitioner is '37
Ares 87 Square meters'. However, in the petitioner's Land Tax
Receipt, the land in the same Survey number has an extent of
'39 Ares 89 Square meters. This is an anomaly.
6. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner
and the learned Government Pleader, this Court is of the view
that the writ petition can be disposed of directing the 3 rd
WP(C) NO.17483 OF 2022
respondent to consider Ext.P6 application.
The writ petition is therefore disposed of directing the 3 rd
respondent to consider Ext.P6 application submitted by the
petitioner and pass appropriate orders thereon, within a period
of three months, if the application is received and is supported
by all requisite documents and is still pending.
sd/-
N.NAGARESH
JUDGE
hmh
WP(C) NO.17483 OF 2022
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 17483/2022
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
ExhibitP1 A TRUE COPY OF THE TITLE DEED IN FAVOUR
OF THE PETITIONER DATED 06-01-2010
HAVING DOCUMENT NO. 106/1/2010 OF S.R.O
OTTAPPALAM
ExhibitP2 A TRUE COPY OF THE REPORT OF THE 1ST
RESPONDENT DATED 02-01-2009
ExhibitP3 A TRUE COPY OF THE PROPERTY TAX RECEIPT
DATED 24-03-2022 ISSUED BY THE
VANIAMKULAM GRAMA PANCHAYATH
ExhibitP4 A TRUE COPY OF THE RELEVANT PAGE OF THE
DATA BANK REPORT UNDERSIGNED BY THE
AGRICULTURAL OFFICER VANIYAMKULAM DATED
05-02-2022
ExhibitP5 A TRUE COPY OF THE BASIC TAX RECEIPT
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT IN FAVOUR
OF THE PETITIONER DATED 13-05-2022
ExhibitP6 A TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER TO THE 2ND
RESPONDENT DATED 16-05-2022
