Kerala High Court
Sunil Mathew vs Special Tahsildar (Land Assignment), ... on 28 June, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
WP(C) NO. 26600 OF 2016 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
FRIDAY, THE 28TH DAY OF JUNE 2024 / 7TH ASHADHA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 26600 OF 2016
PETITIONER/S:
SUNIL MATHEW
AGED 40 YEARS
AGED 40 YEARS, S/O. MATHEW, KARUVAKUNNEL HOUSE,
KANCHIYAR VILLAGE, KANCHIYAR P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADVS.
SRI.V.M.KRISHNAKUMAR
SMT.P.R.REENA
RESPONDENT/S:
1 SPECIAL TAHSILDAR (LAND ASSIGNMENT), KATTAPPANA
KATTAPPANA, IDUKKI DISTRICT.
2 ADDITIONAL TAHSILDAR
TALUK OFFICE, IDUKKI.
3 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
VILLAGE OFFICE, KANCHIYAR P.O., IDUKKI DISTRICT.
BY ADV GOVERNMENT PLEADER
OTHER PRESENT:
SRI.B.S.SYAMANTAK, GP
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION
ON 28.06.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE
FOLLOWING:
WP(C) NO. 26600 OF 2016 2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
--------------------------------------
W.P.(C.) No. 26600 of 2016
--------------------------------------
Dated this the 28th day of June, 2024
JUDGMENT
The above writ petition is filed with following prayers :
"i. Call for records leading to Exhibit P2 and quash Exhibit.
P2
ii. Issue a writ in the nature of mandamus commanding the
1st Respondent to consider and pass orders on the land
assignment applications submitted by the petitioner evidenced
by Ext.P3 and P4 application filed by the Petitioner with notice
to him within such time as may be deemed fit by this Hon'ble
Court and until the decision is taken direct the respondents not
to proceed with Ext.P2 notice in view of exception of rule 7 of
the Kerala Land Conservancy Rules 1958.
iii. issue such other orders, writs or directions as are
deemed fit by this Hon'ble court.
iv. Award cost of this proceedings to the petitioners." [sic]
2. When this writ petition came up for consideration,
the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the
petitioner will be satisfied if a direction is issued to consider
Ext.P4 pending before the 1 st respondent and till then, the
interim order already passed by this Court may be allowed to
continue.
3. Heard the learned Government Pleader also.
4. After hearing both sides, I think that prayer can be
allowed. But I make it clear that I have not considered the
matter on merit and the 1st respondent is free to pass
appropriate orders in the application.
Therefore, this writ petition is disposed of with the
following directions :
1) The 1st respondent is directed to consider and pass
appropriate orders in Ext.P4, if it is received and
pending as on today, after giving an opportunity of
hearing to the petitioner, as expeditiously as possible, at
any rate within four months from the date of receipt of a
certified copy of this judgment.
2) If orders are passed in Ext.P4, a copy of the same shall
be communicated to the petitioner.
3) Till final orders are passed in Ext.P4, if not already
passed, the status quo as on today will continue.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
SKS
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 26600/2016
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE TAX RECEIPT ISSUED FOR
THE PERIOD 2015-16 DATED 1-8-2015.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 07-07-2016
ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P3 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DATED 30-01-2012
ISSUED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT TO THE
PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P4 TRUE COPY OF THE APPLICATION FORM DATED
11-02-2012 DULY FILED AND SUBMITTED BY
THE PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P5 TRUE COPY OF MINUTES OF MEETING HELD ON
1-1-2016 UNDER THE CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE
CHIEF MINISTER.
EXHIBIT P6 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE DISTRICT
COLLECTOR IDUKKI TO THE HON'BLE MEMBER OF
PARLIAMENT DATED 25-02-2016.
EXHIBIT P7 TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER OF THE KSEB DATED
25-02-2016.
