Moosakutty vs The Tahsildar, Alathur Taluk
2024 Latest Caselaw 10541 Ker

Citation : 2024 Latest Caselaw 10541 Ker
Judgement Date : 11 April, 2024

Kerala High Court

Moosakutty vs The Tahsildar, Alathur Taluk on 11 April, 2024

Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan

WP(C) NO. 23363 OF 2017            1




                  IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
                                  PRESENT
               THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
    THURSDAY, THE 11TH DAY OF APRIL 2024 / 22ND CHAITHRA, 1946
                          WP(C) NO. 23363 OF 2017
PETITIONER/S:
          MOOSAKUTTY
          S/O. USSANAR, AGED 56 YEARS, KOMATHUPARAMBU HOUSE,
          VAVULLIAPURAM P.O, ALATHUR TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT.

               BY ADVS.
               SRI.JOHN JOSEPH(ROY)
               SRI.C.G.ANTU CHATHELY GEORGE


RESPONDENT/S:
     1    THE TAHSILDAR, ALATHUR TALUK
          ALATHUR P.O, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 678 541.

      2        THE VILLAGE OFFICER
               TARUR II VILLAGE, VALULLIYAPURAM, TARUR P.O, ALATHUR
               PALAKKADU DISTRICT, PIN 678 547.

      3        SABARAIGIRISAN
               PUTHENKALAM, VAVULLAPURAM, TARUR P.O, ALATHUR TALUK,
               PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN 678 547.

      4        THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
               CIVIL STATION, PALAKKAD, PIN 678 001.

               BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER


OTHER PRESENT:
          SRI.RIYAL DEVASSY, GP

     THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON
11.04.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
 WP(C) NO. 23363 OF 2017              2




                       P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
                   ---------------------------------------
                     W.P.(C.) No. 23363 of 2017
                    --------------------------------------
              Dated this the 11th day of April, 2024


                                 JUDGMENT

The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :

"(i) Issue a writ of mandamus or other direction, commanding Respondents 1, 2 and 4 to take adequate and effective measures to restore the paddy field partially reclaimed by the 3rd Respondent to make it fit for cultivation and will not cause obstruction to the flow of water in the padasekaharam.

(ii) Issue a writ of mandamus, commanding Respondents 1,2 and 4 to make field effective measures to prevent illegal reclamation of paddy field in the locality where abundant water from canal is available.

(iii) Issue a writ of mandamus to the 4th Respondent to issue orders directing the 3rd Respondent to restore the paddy field in its original position before the reclamation. And

(iv) To grant such other reliefs as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit, just and proper in the facts of the case." [sic]

2. When this writ petition came up for consideration, the

learned Government Pleader takes me though para Nos. 3 and 4

of the statement filed by the 1 st respondent and the same is

extracted hereunder :

3. "On 24.05.2017, a report was submitted by the Village Officer, Tharur-2 stating that the respondent, the owner and possessor of the land had submitted an affidavit affirming reclamation of the land, which was inspected and confirmed that the converted land has been re-converted to its previous state. These respondents (1st and 2nd) do not know regarding the petition filed by the petitioner before the agricultural department authorities. But a report regarding the issue was submitted to the Revenue Divisional Officer, Palakkad on 26.04.2017 by the 2nd respondent as per a letter received from the Revenue Divisional Office.

4. On 24.07.2017 the free flow of water is ensured. Thus the allegations that the free flow of rain water was prevented is negated. These respondents had taken all legal actions for preventing violation as per the provisions of related acts. There is no wilful default, delay or latches on the part of these respondents in performing their duties. The allegations against these respondents are liable to be rejected."

3. In the light of the same, nothing survives in this case.

Recording the above statement, this writ petition is closed.

sd/-

P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN JUDGE SKS

APPENDIX OF WP(C) 23363/2017

PETITIONER EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT P1. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT ON 21.4.17.

EXHIBIT P2. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE R.D.O DATED 21.4.17.

EXHIBIT P3. COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSISTANT DEPUTY DIRECTOR AGRICULTURE PALAKKAD DATED 24.4.16.

EXHIBIT P4. COPY OF THE REPORT DATED 26.4.17 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT TO THE R.D.O.

EXHIBIT P5. COPY OF THE B.T.R IN RESPECT OF THE PROPERTY INVOLVED IN THE CASE.

EXHIBIT P6. COPY OF THE PAPER REPORT PUBLISHED IN MATHRUBHUMY DAILY DATED 25.4.17.