Shibu K George vs The Secretary
2023 Latest Caselaw 11238 Ker

              IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                               PRESENT
             THE HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE ANU SIVARAMAN
                                  &
            THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE C.PRATHEEP KUMAR
   FRIDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF OCTOBER 2023 / 5TH KARTHIKA, 1945
                         WA NO.1869 OF 2023
        JUDGMENT IN WP(C) 32931/2023 OF HIGH COURT OF KERALA
                          DATED 18.10.2023
                        --------------------
APPELLANT/PETITIONER :-

            SHIBU K GEORGE, AGED 58 YEARS
            S/O.GEORGE K.V., KUTTIYIL HOUSE, MANJANIKKARA,
            OMALLOOR PO, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689 647.

            BY ADV SADCHITH.P.KURUP


RESPONDENTS/RESPONDENTS :-

    1       THE SECRETARY
            DEPARTMENT OF CO-OPERATION, GOVERNMENT SECRETARIAT
            THIRUVANANTHAPURAM, PIN - 695 001.

    2       THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATION
            OFFICE OF THE JOINT REGISTRAR OF CO-OPERATION,
            CIVIL STATION, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689 645.

    3       THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
            COLLECTORATE, PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689 645.

    4       THE TAHSILDAR
            KOZHENCHERRY TALUK OFFICE, KOZHENCHERRY,
            PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689 645.

    5       THE VILLAGE OFFICER
            OMALLUR VILLAGE OFFICE, OMALLUR,
            PATHANAMTHITTA, PIN - 689 647.

            SRI.B.UNNIKRISHNA KAIMAL, SR.GP


     THIS    WRIT   APPEAL   HAVING   COME   UP   FOR   ADMISSION   ON
27.10.2023, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WA NO.1869 OF 2023

                                -: 2 :-


                            JUDGMENT

Dated this the 27th day of October, 2023

Anu Sivaraman, J.

Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and the learned

Government Pleader.

2. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the appellant

that the prayer in the writ petition was a challenge against Exts.P4

and P5 demand notices issued under the Revenue Recovery Act and

that a further prayer was made for a consideration of Ext.P2

revision petition preferred against an order of surcharge imposed

on the appellant and others. It is submitted that in a writ petition

filed by two of the other persons who are surcharged along with the

appellant, the learned Single Judge had rightly kept the revenue

recovery proceedings in abeyance. However, in the appellant's

case, even though there was a specific prayer made for the said

purpose in the writ petition, the said relief has not been granted by

the learned Single Judge.

3. The learned Government Pleader points out that in case a

prayer has been made for the specific purpose and has not been

considered by the learned Single Judge, the proper course of action

available to the appellant would be to file a review petition. WA NO.1869 OF 2023

Having considered the contentions advanced and in view

of the fact that the appellant has sought for the reliefs in the writ

petition, we are of the opinion that the said relief is liable to be

granted. The Writ Appeal is disposed of directing that till Ext.P2

revision petition is considered and disposed of by the Government,

the revenue recovery proceedings initiated against the appellant as

per Exts.P4 and P5 shall be kept in abeyance.

Sd/-

ANU SIVARAMAN JUDGE

Sd/-

C. PRATHEEP KUMAR JUDGE

Jvt/30.10.2023