Kerala High Court
Mohammed Noushad vs The Village Officer on 27 March, 2024
Author: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
Bench: P.V.Kunhikrishnan
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
WEDNESDAY, THE 27TH DAY OF MARCH 2024 / 7TH CHAITHRA, 1946
WP(C) NO. 16120 OF 2017
PETITIONERS:
1 MOHAMMED NOUSHAD
AGED 28 YEARS
S/O.KUNJUMUHAMMED, URULANKUNNATHU HOUSE,
KOZHIKOTTERI P.O., MUTHUTHALA VILLAGE, PATTAMBI
TALUK, PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679303.
2 MOHINUDHEEN
AGED 30 YEARS, S/O.KUNJUMUHAMMED, URULANKUNNATHU
HOUSE,KOZHIKOTTERI P.O., MUTHUTHALA VILLAGE,
PATTAMBI TALUK,PALAKKAD DISTRICT, PIN-679303.
BY ADV SRI.P.M.ZIRAJ
RESPONDENTS:
1 THE VILLAGE OFFICER
MUTHUMALA VILLAGE, PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679303.
2 THE DISTRICT COLLECTOR
PALAKKAD DISTRICT-679303.
BY ADV.
SRI.B.S.SYAMANTAK, GOVERNMENT PLEADER
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR
ADMISSION ON 27.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY
DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING:
W.P.(C) No.16120 of 2017
2
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
---------------------------------------------
W.P.(C) No. 16120 of 2017
------------------------------------------------------
Dated this the 27th day of March, 2024.
JUDGMENT
This writ petition is filed with the following
reliefs:
"1. Issue a writ of certiorari or any other
appropriate writ, order or direction by calling for
the records leading to the issuance of Exhibit P1
and P2 orders and set aside the same as illegal.
2. Direct the first respondent to receive
land tax of the property of petitioners and issue
receipt for the same forthwith."[SIC]
2. Petitioners are aggrieved by Exts.P1 and P2
stop memos issued by the Village officer. According
to the petitioners, only the District Collector has got
power to take action as per Section 13 of the Kerala
Conservation of Paddy Land and Wet Land Act, 2008
(for short 'Act 2008'). The learned Government
Pleader submitted that Exts.P1 and P2 are only stop
memos and no powers under Section 13 of Act 2008
is invoked by the Village Officer. But a perusal of
Exts.P1 and P2 would not show that it is an order
passed after giving an opportunity of hearing to the
petitioners. When this Writ petition came up for
consideration on 07.06.2017, this Court passed the
following order:
"Exts.P1 and P2 shall be stayed to the extent it
directs resumption. However the petitioners shall
also not carry on any activity in the subject property.
Post next week."
3. The above order is in force even now. In
such circumstances, I am of the considered opinion
that, without going to the merit of the case, Exts.P1
and P2 can be set aside and there can be a direction
to the officer concerned to reconsider the matter
after considering the legal contentions raised by the
petitioners in this Writ petition.
Therefore, this Writ Petition is disposed of with
the following directions:
1. Exts.P1 and P2 are set aside.
2. The 1st respondent is directed to
reconsider the matter after giving an
opportunity of hearing to the
petitioners, as expeditiously as
possible, at any rate, within a period
of five months from the date of
receipt of a certified copy of this
judgment.
3. Till final orders are passed, the
petitioners shall not carry out any
activities in the subject property.
4. I make it clear that, if any
proceedings under Section 13 of Act
2008 is initiated by the District
Collector, the same can be proceeded
in accordance with law.
Sd/-
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN
JUDGE
DM
APPENDIX OF WP(C) 16120/2017
PETITIONER EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT P1 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE
NO.130/17(1) DATED 10-04-2017
ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO
THE FIRST PETITIONER.
EXHIBIT P2 TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE
NO.130/17(1) DATED 10-04-2017
ISSUED BY THE FIRST RESPONDENT TO
THE 2ND PETITIONER.
RESPONDENTS EXHIBITS: NIL
//TRUE COPY//
PA TO JUDGE
